you only have to watch a video about only 2 minutes and i provide you a word file that will help you to write only 300 words. The United States space shuttle program had successfully completed 20 miss
Avoid the Trappings of Small Groups
Over the years, there have been several problems that have been identified regarding working in small groups. These include:
Groupthink – Groupthink is the tendency of members of a group to agree on a solution based on group consensus alone rather than weighing all of the possible options. Often times, this is a result of the pressure felt by individuals from other members of the group to maintain the status quo and go along with a popular decision. It is important to remember that the right solution is not always the popular one and speaking up can mean a world of difference. Janis (1972) notes that historically groupthink has had disastrous consequences. For example, individuals who did not speak up over their concern regarding the vulnerability of Pearl Harbor prior to its attack remained silent due to the fact that the majority of individuals in charge of national security did not think that there was a plausible threat.⁸Unfortunately, their silence was deadly. There are ways, however, to combat groupthink in a small group. Janis offers the following nine ideas as solutions to this problem:
Solution #1 – Assign the role of critical evaluator to each member; encourage the group to give high priority to open airing of objections and doubts.
Solution #2 – Key members of a hierarchy should adopt an impartial stance instead of stating preferences and expectations at the beginning of assigning a policy-planning mission to any group or individual.
Solution #3 – Routinely set up several outside policy-planning and evaluation groups within the organization to work on the same policy question, each deliberating under a different leader to prevent insulation of an in-group.
Solution #4 – Require each member to discuss the group’s deliberations with associates, if any, in his or her own unit of the organization before reaching a consensus. Then report back their reactions to the group.
Solution #5 – Invite one or more outside experts to each meeting on a staggered basis and encourage experts to challenge the views of the core members.
Solution #6 – At least one member should play the devil’s advocate at every general meeting of the group to challenge the testimony of those who advocate the majority position.
Solution #7 – Whenever the issue involves relations with rival organizations, devote a sizable block of time to a survey of all warning signals from these rivals and write alternative scenarios of their intentions.
Solution #8 – When surveying alternatives for feasibility and effectiveness, divide the group from time to time into two or more subgroups to meet separately, under different chairs. Then come back together to hammer out differences.
Solution #9 – Hold a “second chance” meeting after reaching a preliminary consensus about what seems to be the best decision to allow every member to express his or her residual doubts and to rethink the entire issue before making a definitive choice.⁹
The Ringelmann Effect – The Ringelmann Effect occurs in a small group where a group’s size affects the output of the work done by its members. In other words, the larger the group is, the less work each individual member of the group will do.¹⁰ In order to combat the Ringelmann Effect, each member of a group should be given a specific and unique task to fulfill. This way they are responsible for their own piece of the group’s success rather than simply relying on others to get the job done for them.
