Modeling Team Formation and Interaction

Journal 1: Modeling Team Formation and Interaction

1. Assess the team formation and consensus development process.

According to the article “Developmental Sequence in Small Groups”, a set of essential stages that form the maturity of a team are: the first to determine the orientation of the task & goal and set the basic principle, the second stage is the emergence of the conflicts and division, the third stage is making agreement and the formation of cohesion that broke the original principle and establish a new rule, and the last stage is the appearance of the team.  Coming to the development process of consensus.

2. Apply the observational classification methods used in one or more of the team process models discussed in the readings to analyze the team formation and interaction process in the movie.

Combing this movie with the articles in the first question, it’s a Human relations Training group also a nature group that build with 12 jurors, and the goal of the jury team is to judge whether the boy who accused killed his father was guilty or not. During making a consensus discussion, they select evident materials and stand in their own ground to argue and try to convince the opponents.

3 How were the proposed model propositions supported or questioned by the team interaction?

Team interaction supports proposed model proposition by means of emergent states. During the discussion, the emergent states reflect the attitudes, acknowledge, emotion, motivation and value that all of which are key factors input in teamwork and can influence the model propositions in team at last. In the movie 26:53, for example, the #3 juror judges because of his personal emotion to his son to judge the boy is guilty. At the 1:28:45, the #7 juror wants to finish the discussion and make agreement just because his baseball tickets.

Team interaction also can question and overturn the proposed model proposition by means of showing different idea and making disagreement. In the movie, 15:56, is the first time agree between #7 and #8 that makes team smell of gunpowder.

4 What team interactions were not explained or predicted by the team process model?

In my opinion, during the team interactions, team process model doesn't explain or doesn't remind members to pay attention to what is the difference between the consensus team and no consensus team in expanding theme and acquiring support information, According to the article “Patterns of Interaction in Discussion Groups at Varying Distance from Consensus”, the decision- making discussion and members’ characteristic are the same important and the reason why team can’t make agreement and consensus is that members don't have a sensitive to the attributions that others did in expanding theme and find support information. Both of these are not mention in the process model. In the movie, 52:50, all the members are not sensitive or not care about the evident that #8 juror found to support the boy’s innocent, and at 57:43, even more probability that # 9 juror said still can’t wake the sensitive of other members to realize that they could make an error in judgement. In order to convince the diehard ones, # 8 gives more support evident to contradict the unreasonable testimony (at 1:11:43 and 1:13:39) and # 9 gives more reasonable explain about the fake testimony from woman (1:50:27) to persuade most of jurors except # 3 so that a team consensus established.

...