GROUP AND TEAM

COMMUNICATION

UNIT:BUSINESS
COMMUNICATION
GROUP COMMUNICATION SKILLS
GROUP COMMUNICATION
Group communication is the passing of information in an organization between people
who are members of a group.
It is effective when the facilitator brings out the message clearly and when the members
have the same mission or target.
It can be done through social media, official writing or orally. The nature may be
social(informal) or business(formal).

THEORYS OF GROUP COMMUNICATION

We will look at four theories of group communication as they are the most researched
about.
1.Functional Theory
The functional approach to group communication is concerned with the results or
outcomes of group behaviors and structures. This perspective sees communication as the
tool group members use to solve problems and make decisions. Communication helps
group members by promoting rational judgments and critical thinking, as well as
preventing group members from faulty decision-making and flawed problem solving.
Thus, communication is instrumental because it provides the means by which group
members can achieve their goals.
Research conducted from this perspective suggests that several conditions must exist for
group members to make appropriate decisions and effectively solve problems. For
example, group members must:

-commit to making the best decision,

-identify resources needed to carry out the group's charge,
-determine procedures for the group to follow,
-articulate procedural rules and interaction practices, and
-review the decision-making process and make any necessary adjustments to the
decision.

According to the functional perspective, groups follow systematic procedures to

accomplish their tasks, group members must:

demonstrate that they understand the charge,

establish criteria with which to evaluate possible solutions,
develop alternative solutions,
evaluate those alternatives by comparing them to each other and the previously-
established criteria, and
use the evaluation to choose between alternatives.
The functional approach to group communication has several strengths.
1. Functional theory is prescriptive in nature. That is, it suggests that critical thinking,
sound logic, informed discussion, and systematic procedures are essential to effective
decision making and problem solving.
2. This approach emphasizes the purpose communication serves in groups.
3. Researchers from this perspective have studied both laboratory groups (e.g., student
groups) and natural groups (e.g., work teams). Examining groups in the laboratory and
in their natural environment provides more support for the theory and makes it easier
to develop general theory from specific examples.

The theory has weaknesses as well.

1. Assessing outcomes is challenging. For example, a given solution might be best for the
group, but it may have harmful consequences for other members of the organization. In
addition, a decision may seem appropriate today, but in 10 years, it might turn out to be a
poor one.
2. Some researchers argue that decision making is not rational. Emotions, power, hidden
agendas, interpersonal conflicts, competing goals, and forces outside the group all play a
part in the final decision a group makes. Thus, the functional theory may not provide a
very useful picture of decision making and problem solving in naturally occurring groups.
3. Researchers have found it difficult to consistently identify the key group functions
essential to small group decision making and problem solving. It is difficult to pinpoint
group functions that remain consistent from group to group; even a given group will use
different functions as time passes and circumstances change.
2.Symbolic convergence theory
It studies the sensemaking function of communication. "Symbolic" refers to verbal and
nonverbal messages and "convergence" refers to shared understanding and meaning. In
small groups, members develop private code words and signals that only those inside the
group understand. When groups achieve symbolic convergence, they have a sense of
community based on common experiences and understandings.

Central to this theory is the idea that group members share fantasies that serve as critical
communication episodes, forming the basis for members' sensemaking. Sharing fantasies
helps group members create a social reality that indicates who is part of the group and
who is not. Sharing fantasy themes increases group cohesiveness as members develop a
common interpretation of their experiences. Fantasy themes are stories or narratives that
help group members interpret group interactions and their surrounding environment.
Fantasy themes develop when group members actively engage in dramatizing, elaborating
on, and modifying a story. In this way, the story becomes publicly shared within the group
as well as privately shared by each group member.

Researchers have observed group members "chaining out" fantasy themes. In chaining
out, group members tell a story in a collaborative manner. Often, no single narrator can be
identified. A group meeting may start out in a rational, predictable manner, but when
someone begins to tell a story, the others will start to help dramatize the message. As
group members come to share fantasy themes, a simple word, phrase, or gesture can take
participants back to that drama.
 Strengths of symbolic convergence theory:
1.It focuses on group identity and the development of group consciousness. This theory
is descriptive rather than predictive. Symbolic Convergence Theory helps us understand
how group members interact and provides a way of examining small group culture. We
can also determine who is a group member and who isn't depending on whether they
are familiar with the group's fantasy themes, inside jokes, and rhetorical vision.
2. Symbolic Convergence Theory is useful for examining groups in organizations
because is provides a useful way to compare them; similarities and differences in the
rhetorical visions and fantasies of small groups are often significant.

Symbolic Convergence Theory has its critics:

1.Some people believe the theory is not useful because it is not predictive or evaluative.
That is, we can't make predictions about group outcomes based on fantasy themes, nor
have researchers evaluated the quality of fantasy themes and the contributions they
make to the group's task accomplishment.
2.Researchers who apply Symbolic Convergence Theory to small groups tend to assume
that fantasies themes and rhetorical visions have singular meanings for all group
members. It may be the case that stories and images have many different meanings for
group members, even though participants might believe they have a shared
understanding of their experiences.
3. Symbolic Convergence Theory assumes that all group members have equal influence
in creating fantasy themes and rhetorical visions. This is hard to believe, since nearly all
groups have power imbalances based on formal and/or informal roles. Thus, some
group members' voices rise above the others in group interactions.
3.Structuration Theory
It distinguishes between systems, such as small groups, and structures, the practices,
rules, norms, and other resources the system uses to function and sustain itself. When
applied to small groups, Structuration Theory views small groups as systems that both
produce structures and are produced by structures. This means that group members
follow particular rules in their interactions that produce some sort of outcome. That
outcome eventually influences the group's future interactions.

Structuration refers to the processes group members employ as they work together.
Structures both produce a system (in this case, a group) and are outcomes of a system.
Other structures include methods of voting, norms of interaction, leadership styles,
decision-making procedures, and rules for distributing the group's workload.

According to Structuration Theory, group members interact according to particular rules,

and those group members also produce those rules through their interactions. This
suggests that group members can negotiate group structures, yet at the same time, their
interactions are constrained by those structures. For example, group members may decide
to take turns leading each group meeting. The group member in charge of a particular
meeting constructs and distributes the agenda, reminds others of the meeting, and makes
arrangements for the meeting room. However, if the group found this structure was not
working (e.g., group members forgot when it was their turn to lead the meeting),
members could consider changing their procedures.
Structuration theorists are interested in the way group members enact structures in their
interactions. So structuration researchers observe group interaction directly. Researchers
have examined the way group members' attitudes affect the structuration process, the
influence of different types of structures on group decision-making and problem-solving,
institutional constraints on group structures, and appropriated structures (those taken
from other sources, such as majority rule in voting) and those that are unique to the
group.

The strengths of Structuration Theory:

1. It examines structures in action by focusing on the structuring process. Thus, attention
is on small group interaction and how group members appropriate, adapt, create, and
maintain rules and resources.
2. Structuration Theory is applicable to a variety of small groups, not just those that
perform decision-making and problem-solving functions. In this way, Structuration
Theory can help us understand an array of small groups, from corporate committee to
self-help groups.
3. Structuration Theory takes into account environmental forces that may impinge on
group processes.
Structuration Theory suffers from several weaknesses as well.
1. Structuration Theory to date has not provided a way of predicting which
circumstances will result in the development of particular structures. That is,
Structuration Theory is largely descriptive in nature.
2. Because structures are both system producers and the outcome of systems, it is
difficult to research structuration in small groups. Researchers must examine group
member communication as they put structures into action, as well as the structure that
arises from that interaction.
3. The very definition of structuration implies that group structures change over time.
Yet, it is often difficult to pinpoint which structural changes occurred and when by
examining group interaction on a day-to-day basis.
4. Research in Structuration Theory relies primarily on case studies. Structuration
Theory can be adapted to individual cases, but because it is flexible, it is difficult to
make generalizations based on Structuration Theory.
GROUP COMMUNICATON SKILLS
Cohesiveness
Effective teams need to work well together and that team cohesiveness depends on building
strong relationships among team members. Communication is critical and is driven by the
team leader who will work with the team to establish ground rules and work to bring the
team together so that it can accomplish its goals.

Sharing
When team communication skills are strong, it raises the chance that good ideas and best
practices will be shared openly. Teams that can establish an open, positive and supportive
environment among team members are in a better position to hear those good ideas and
learn from the best practices of the group.

Professional Development
Effective team communication can lead to both personal and professional development.
Team leaders will be influenced by the coaching and counseling skills of the team leader
and, when the team leader is a positive role model, these insights can help employees
improve their own communication skills. Strong team communication skills can also help
team members learn how to manage conflict in positive ways, an important professional
development skill.
COMMUNICATION NETWORK
Communication networks are the patterns individuals or groups
who are the transmitters and receivers of information in a given
organization .
There are 5 types of communication networks
1.star
Under star communication network all members of the group communicate with each
other and exchange information. This network is a must for group communication or
where teamwork is involved. This network channel of communication is open to all
members of the group. The members communicate with each other without hesitation.
2. Circle
Under this network two persons communicate with each other. Say Mr. ‘A’ sends message
to Mr. ‘B’. After receiving message Mr. ‘B’ communicates the feedback message to Mr. ‘A’. So
communication takes the form of a circuit. Therefore it is known as circuit network. It is
similar to vertical network but in circuit network ‘A’ and ‘B’ are not necessarily superior
and subordinates.
3.wheel
Here all subordinates receive commands from one superior. This is highly centralized
type of communication network where each subordinate receives commands or
instructions from a single authority or superior ‘A’ and wants the immediate feedback.
4.chain
This network of communication follows the organizational hierarchy and chain of
command. All subordinates receive commands or instructions from their superior. B, C, D
and E, F, G are the subordinates to A in the organizational hierarchy and receive
commands from ‘A’ which follows the way shown in the diagram.
5.Y –pattern
This used when two or more A and B people report to the third C who then passes it to D
and E
PUBLIC DISCUSSION FORMAT
PANEL DISCUSSION
A panel discussion is a specific format used in a meeting,
conference or convention. It is a live or virtual discussion about a
specific topic amongst a selected group of panelists who share
differing perspectives in front of a larger audience.
Select a topic. Ideally, the topic of discussion should be important to
enough people that you can involve people with significantly
different interests or backgrounds. However, avoid the trap of
making a topic so general or vague that the discussion becomes
unfocused. If you are having difficulty balancing these goals,
remember the topic does not need to be divisive. Some panels are
created to offer advice or information, and these do not always have
competing points of view on display.
2
Recruit varied participants. A panel of three to five people usually creates the most
interesting discussion. Look for well-informed people from a variety of backgrounds. For
instance, a member of the public involved in the issue, someone with experience working
with the issue in a business or nonprofit, and an academic who has studied the issue.
Create a panel with variation in age, gender, and ethnicity as well, as a person's personal
background can have a significant effect on his perspective. Inviting at least four people
may be safest, in case someone cancels at the last minute.
Invite these people several weeks in advance at a minimum, to allow them adequate time
to prepare, and to give yourself time to find alternatives if one of them turns the offer
down.
3
Invite a moderator. Select an additional person not participating in the panel discussion,
to serve as a moderator. Ideally, she should already have experience moderating panels.
Select someone who understands the topic well enough to follow the discussion, and who
is skilled in social situations. The moderator's main purpose is to keep the panelists
focused on the audience, keep the discussion running smoothly, and help out the panelists
when they stall.
4
Plan the physical setup. Individual chairs will make the participants appear closer to the
audience than a solid table, encouraging audience participation. Arranging the seats in a
slight circle, still mostly facing the audience, may help the panelists discuss the topic with
each other. Include small tables or stands for holding notes, and provide a glass of water
for each participant. Unless the room seats thirty people or fewer, provide at least one
microphone for each two participants, and a personal microphone for the moderator.
Consider seating the moderator in the middle of the panelists to help him address and
guide each panelist efficiently. Keeping the moderator at a podium off to one side may
make his job more difficult.
Part2
Planning the Panel Discussion
1
Figure out the goals of the panel. Make sure all of the participants know why the panel
has been assembled well in advance, so they have time to prepare. Your panel may be
trying to present practical solutions to a problem, host a complex, abstract discussion, or
provide information on a topic. Let the panelists know whether the panel is a basic
introduction to the topic, or whether they can expect the audience to be fairly well-
informed and looking for more advanced advice or nuanced perspectives.
.
2
Decide how long the panel should last. For most panels, especially those taking place at a
conference or other larger event, 45–60 minutes is the recommended length of time. If the
panel is a standalone event, or if it covers a particularly important and popular topic, a 90
minute panel may be appropriate. If possible, ask participants to stick around for some time
after the session, so audience members can talk in person.
3
Consider starting with individual lectures (optional). The main focus of the panel
should always be a discussion. However, if one of the panel's main goals is providing
information, this may be a useful way to precede the discussion. Have each panelist provide
an explanation of the topic, or her argument concerning the topic, lasting no more than ten
minutes per person. This method may require more preparation time for the panelists as a
group, as each panelist should build off the previous argument, rather than cover the same
ground
4
Try to avoid visual presentations. Unless absolutely necessary for the topic, avoid
PowerPoint presentations and slides. They tend to slow down the discussion, keep
audience involvement low, and often bore the listeners. Use a small number of slides, and
only when information or diagrams need to be presented that cannot easily be explained
in words alone.If a panelist asks for permission to create a presentation, suggest he bring
in "show and tell" items instead to pass around the audience during discussion.
5
Write questions for the panelists. Try to come up with several open-ended questions,
which the panelists can take in a direction best suited to the course of the discussion and
their expertise. A few more specific questions directed at an individual panelist are also
acceptable, but try to divide these among the panelists fairly evenly. Anticipate questions
audience members might ask, and include these as well. Arrange these in rough order of
most to least importance, as you should provide more questions than you expect to get
through. Try to keep each question tied into the last however, avoiding a sudden change of
topic.Have the moderator or another person not on the panel look over your questions and
suggest edits or additional questions.
If you are having trouble coming up with questions, ask each panelist individually what he
would like to ask the other panelists. Include the best of these questions in your list.
6
Plan out the rest of the panel. Determine how much time you will set aside for
questions; typically, this constitutes half the panel's length or more. Use the last 20–30
minutes for audience questions and discussion, or 15 minutes if time is short or you have
a more lecture-focused panel format.
7
Introduce the panelists to each other in advance. Have the panelists meet in person or
attend a conference call together, a week or more in advance of the panel. Describe the
format of the panel to them, and give them a chance to talk briefly. They may briefly
determine who should field questions on which topic, but don't give them the specific
questions in advance. The discussion should be original, not rehearsed.
Part3
Moderating a Panel Discussion
1
Convince people to sit in the front row. The closer the panel is to the audience member,
the more energetic and involved the atmosphere will feel. Consider offering small
"freebies" if people move to the front rows, such as buttons or candy.
2
Briefly introduce the panel and each participant. Use only one or two sentences to
introduce the panel topic, since most audience members present are likely familiar with
the basic idea. Introduce each participant briefly, mentioning only a couple relevant facts
about her experience or involvement related to the topic. Avoid going into a complete
biography; the introduction of all participants should take no more than ten minutes total.
3
Involve the audience early. Get the audience invested in the panel by asking for their
involvement right away. A simple, quick way to do this is to begin by asking for a rough poll
of their opinion related to the topic, using a show of hands or applause.Alternatively, poll
the audience on their level of knowledge of the topic. The results should help you keep the
panel focused on topics most relevant to the audience.
4
Ask the panelists the prepared questions. Start going through the questions in the
prearranged order, but don't hesitate to adjust this order if the discussion moved in a
different, interesting direction. Divide questions among the participants, aiming them at the
person most knowledgeable on the topic. Give other panelists a short amount of time to
respond, then move on to the next question.Don't have every panelist weigh in on every
question. Let the panelists respond naturally, when they have something to say, or prompt
someone who is knowledgeable on the topic if the discussion is faltering.
5
Follow through with your own questions as necessary. You may deviate from the
prepared questions whenever you think it will benefit from the discussion. In particular,
press a panelist with a followup question if you think his answer is unsatisfying. Try
rephrasing the original question, or ideally, come up with a more nuanced question that ties
the last response to another discussion point or a previous statement
6
Get a timekeeper. You may look at an actual clock offstage or on the opposite wall, if one is
clearly visible. Otherwise, have someone stand at the back of the room with visible signs
saying "10 min," "5 min," and "1 min", holding these up as appropriate when you are nearing
the end of a section
.
7
Keep the panelists on task. When a panelist is going on too long, or going off topic,
politely return the discussion to the correct point. When she pauses for breath, jump in
with a phrase similar to one of the following. You may choose to let panelists know
beforehand what phrases you'll be using to bring them back on track."You have an
interesting point, but let's hear more about ___"
"Let's see what (other panelist) has to say on that topic, especially how it relates to __."
8
Collect questions from the audience. Let the audience know how you plan to recruit
question, for instance by calling on raised hands or inviting them to wait in line at a
microphone. Listen to each question in turn, repeat it clearly so everyone in the room can
hear, then refer it to a panelist who appears interested.Have a couple backup questions
ready to ask yourself, or have an assistant in the audience ask, in case no one is brave
enough to ask first question.
If an audience member is taking up too much time, politely interrupt to say "So your
question is ___, is that right?" or "I'm sorry, we need to keep things moving. What is your
question?"
Let people know when you only have enough time for two or three more questions.
9
Thank everyone involved. Thank the panelists, the hosts and organizers of the event,
and the audience members. Let the audience members know the location and topic of an
upcoming event, if you are at a symposium or conference
SYMPOSIUM
Symposium: a meeting or conference for the discussion of some
subject, especially a meeting at which several speakers talk on or
discuss a topic before an audience. Conference: a meeting for
consultation or discussion:
General Considerations
An academic conference like the Symposium is meant not simply
as a chance to to present finished work, but more importantly as
an opportunity for scholars to share work in progress with other
scholars and with an engaged audience.
Audience members see how other scholars working on similar
or parallel questions construct their objects of study, handle
evidence and interpretation, and make arguments about the
significance of their work.
Presenters get substantial feedback from the audience about the
persuasiveness of their work, as well as suggestions about other
ways of understanding it.
Conversation will be organized by a moderator, an established local scholar whose job it
will be to help identify and consolidate interesting results of the discussion.
Presenters should feel free to solicit help from the audience, and the audience should feel
empowered to offer their personal and scholarly responses to the work they hear. Both
sides are welcome to disagree, to explore unanticipated connections between their work,
to consider the nuances or significance of the work presented, or engage in any other
kind of free and frank discussion.

Specific Presentation Formats

Aside from the more general expectations of conference presentation outlined above,
each presentation format and style comes with its own expectations, whether you are
reading a paper as part of a panel, participating in a roundtable, or present a poster.

Panel
A panel session generally will comprise three presenters each speaking for15 to 20
minutes, followed by 15 to 30 minutes of discussion.A presentation may be a written
essay read out loud (the convention in the humanities), a more informal presentation
delivered from notes or a PowerPoint presentation (the social sciences and sciences), or
some combination. While writing and pacing your presentation, estimate 2 minutes for
a double-spaced page.
Media clips should not overwhelm your presentation, and the general expectation would
be no more than 30-60 seconds per clip and no more than 3 clips in a single presentation.

Roundtables
Roundtable presenters, like panel presenters, are likely to have written an essay
approximately 10 pages long; unlike panel presenters, roundtable presenters will not
perform the entirety of that essay. Rather, a roundtable generally will comprise 4-5
presenters each speaking for 5-10 rehearsed minutes about their work, followed by 30-
50 minutes of more free-ranging discussion among presenters and audience. That
reading (estimate 2-minutes per double-spaced page) might include 1) reading a
synthesized version of your full longer paper, 2) reading the intro part and then talking
through the rest, 3) talking the intro and then reading select passages or discussing one or
two particularly compelling examples. Because time is a limited commodity in this format,
any media clips should be very carefully considered.
The idea here is to get the audience up to speed with what you are doing so they'll be able
to discuss your topic intelligently in the Q & A that follows. In that spirit, roundtable
presenters are expected to have carefully read one another's work ahead of time and
prepared questions for one another (email addresses are given in the program). The Q &
A can be a good place to discuss more fully things you weren't able to work into your
presentation; thus, it can be useful to have prepared some minute-or-so-length parts of
the longer essay for ready response to an appropriate questions.
Poster Sessions
For physical, practical, and intellectual guidelines to creating your poster (and a video of
a past Symposium poster session), see our Poster Session Guidelines.

A poster session generally will compromise 8-10 presenters who occupy a single room;
each presenter stands by their work for the entirety of the 75-minute session
and discusses it one-on-one with the circulating members of the audience.As an option,
presenters may have prepared a handout for interested viewers to take with them (a
modified version of the poster or the data set). It is recommended that you bring a pen
and notebook to record viewers’ comments and suggestions, because you'll get lots of
'em. Additionally, because the poster should be able to stand on its own, more or less, be
sure to include your title, author’s name(s), and contact information for viewers who
may be interested in contacting