Individual Society Sample Assignment

Running Head: Individual Society 1
Individual Society
Name:
Institution:
Course Code:

Individual Society 2
Group Interaction
Clarity of the Intent of the Discussion
The discussion was clear parse since all members in the group participated as per the topic under
consideration. In that connection, it was clear that members were in a position to make viable
decisions and feasible judgment as outcome of the discussion.
Preparedness of Group Members
Majority of group members were fully equipped with ideas in the discussion. They articulated
ideas effectively and comprehensively (Thomas & Harker, 2009). They were fully prepared
through prior research on the issues under consideration. However, a small portion was not fully
prepared and kept asking questions for clarification.
Mode of Participation
Members did not participate equally in the discussion. This could be noted through ideas
articulated by group members. The members who prepared in advance by formulation prior
research participated fully. Their ideas were comprehensive and articulate (Trenholm & Jensen,
2013). They dominated much of discussion. Other group members would only try to comprehend
what was been deliberated.
Group Members’ Points of View
Group members were not open to similar points of view. This was based on the level of
preparedness. Members loaded with ideas would be looked upon by other members on the way
forward. Less informed members would only agree on what informed members deliberated.
Overall Climate of the Discussion
The climate of the discussion was moderate. This was facilitated by group leader who put every
member on track throughout the discussion. The leader would challenge members to offer
concrete ideas. He also controlled members when the discussion went out of hand.

Individual Society 3
Group Productivity on the Discussion
The group was very productive in the discussion. Through rigorous analysis of strategies and
ideas contributed by members, the group managed to achieve goals and objectives (Wood, 2015).
Although members had disagreement in the course of the discussion, the group managed to reach
a win-win situation at the end. All these activities were achieved within the recommended
timelines. This demonstrated ability to use time effectively and efficiently.
Strategies for Future Discussion
I would ensure full participation of group members through sequential presentation strategy. This
is where each member is allocated time to present his views. Other members listen, ask questions
and reach a conclusion. This strategy will make all members active throughout the discussion
hence increasing productivity and outcome per member.
Future Approach to Increase Group Cohesion
I would use subjective approach to make members own the discussion. They will realize the
importance of having a discussion so as to deliberate issues at hand. Apart from group leader, all
other group members must retain status quo so as to promote group cohesion (Rothfuss, 2008).
Therefore, they will suggest ideas without fear of criticism, victimization and stigmatization.
Video Analysis-“Planning a Playground.”
Issues in the Meeting
The members in this group came from the surrounding community where some were familiar
while other were peculiar. They had several issues that were subjected to planning a playground.
The first issue was to determine the budget. This was important so as to have ideas on what they
were really looking for. Some had done prior research on the approximate amount for the
playground. For instance, Aisha had conducted a prior research on the previous budget to
purchase a playground.
According to Aisha, the playground ranged from 5,000 to 50,000. The members discussed on
whether to set a higher amount or lower amount from a baseline of 35,000. After constructive
discussion, they agreed to set a budget target of 35,000. The next issue in the discussion was on