1

A Personal Reflection on Group Process

Valrey Llewlaka
Ferris State University

2
A Personal Reflection on Group Process
This community change group project began as an assignment in NURS 350, Community
Nursing. The group size was predetermined and the choice of members was random. The group
goal was clearly defined in the assignment outline. This group started by preparing a group
contract. Initially, the group leaders appeared to fall naturally to two members, this writer and
Annie. We each began strongly with information and possible contracts. Danielle also
contributed a potential group contract. Annie presented an outline that led to the basis of our
final group contract. Information was widely shared and all members participated and
contributed to the group contract. The contract was intently left with certain non-specific
components, such as defined roles.
My role as a leader involved being aware of group communications and making
suggestions when appropriate; and in some cases promoting discussion by setting up the
discussion board, according to the assignment rubric. The leadership was largely shared by most
of the members. Each of the members contributed to the functional task roles in the form of
information giver and information seeker. There were few instances of disagreement. The term
information giver, information seeker, and disagreer" are listed as functional task roles in
the F. A. Davis presentation, Setting up a virtual group. These moments occurred mainly in
the form of clarifying information or offering improvements to the topic.
My initial observations are that this group performed in the manner of most groups,
beginning by getting to know each other and understanding the member strengths and
weaknesses. The F. A. Davis presentation calls the stages of forming groups storming,
norming, and performing. Generally, these steps occur in the mentioned order. In the case of
this group, this writer would say that storming happened at the end of the project when the

3
group struggled to meet the final deadline. The paper 5 stages of group development adds two
stages to the process and tends to better indicate the main stages of this group. Forming
describes the initial stage of the group members, during which the contract was developed. As
noted storming was not apparent to this writer until near the end of the project deadline. This
writer would call the norming stage as occupying the majority of the project time. The
performing stage was a short-lived and intense portion of the project. The stage of
adjourning is noted as not always being a part of the group process. In the case of this group,
adjourning was included with a brief thank you among the members of the team. Some of the
personal characteristics of the group members were self-identified; some became evident
throughout the course of the exercise. Few disagreements occurred, and when apparent, one
member would quickly step in to modify conversations and keep the group communications
professional.
Decisions were made by all members involved with any particular issue at hand. In some
instances a member may not have had group contact during a particular decision-making process.
That leads to one drawback that was discovered during this group project. The contract was not
exhaustively specific which led to some lack of attention on the project. That lack of attention
was more prominent as other classes and personal demands increased. The length of time
allowed for the project also led to some lack of motivation. The overall feeling appeared to be
that there was time to complete the project. That outlook changed as deadlines approached and
the pace became progressively active, even if for short periods.
This writer notes that the initial efforts of the group were effective and cohesive toward a
shared goal, this would name the group as an effective group according to Kearney-Nunnery,
with an educational purpose. Overall the group was cohesive, with regular participation. It was

4
necessary to offer reminders from one member to another to remember to stay on task. These
reminders were done with understanding due to several traumatic life-events occurring during
the process of the task. Leadership varied among the members of the group, with nearly every
member taking the role at different points through the process. Reviewing the leadership style in
the case of this writer would be seen as democratic, by wanting input from all members, to
laissez-faire, where members are left to their own devices. Members of the team included the
functional task roles of information giver, opinion giver/seeker, coordinator, summarizer, and
procedural technician. There was little reason to deal with difficult people as every member
remained professional overall. No one member overwhelmed or monopolized the group efforts.
At the midpoint and end of the group, the members completed an evaluation of each team
member, including themselves. The midpoint evaluation of this writer was generally positive,
with comments such as contributes to the group, positive attitude, works well with others.
One member stated great leadership qualities and self-directed. The first self-evaluation of
this writer was mainly consistent with the group members. This writer was more aware of the
personal effort needed to help start the group efforts, and that of not wishing to take the official
role of leader. The final evaluation from the group remained largely positive, with some team
members indicating some frustration at the fact that the project was submitted late. I would
agree with that frustration. The personal observations of this writer are that the project was
effective overall. There were areas that could have been improved as far as creating a clearly
defined contract with the intention to maintain ongoing deadlines. It is the belief of this writer
that the process could have been less stressful as the deadline approached if each member would
have had the opportunity to use a well-defined contract to hold each other member accountable
to the team. There were no significant issues that were apparent or needed improving in the

5
communication of team members. The personal view of this writer involves a better
understanding of the need for consistency, not only for the team, but for the writer personally.
Due to the length of the project and the lack of clear intermittent deadlines, this writer fell into
time mismanagement. Many demands occurred during the class, including training for a new job
and then training for an additional position. These outside circumstances became time
consuming and this writer did not take the necessary precautions to ensure adequate time for the
project. The personal issues of this writer combined with that of the other team members led to
rushing during the final days of the project and culminated in offering the presentation a day late.
If this writer understands the goals of this paper, it is to provide insight into how groups are
conducted and how this writer fits into that process. Additionally, this writer has gained
exceptional insight into how participation in group projects affects the writer personally. As the
process of obtaining a bachelor degree in nursing continues, this writer will put additional effort
into the issues identified during the course of the project and paper.

6
Resources
Doerr, M. J. (2014). 5 Stages of Group Development, in NURS 340 VL2 Community Nursing
[group discussion board]. Big Rapids, Michigan: Ferris State University [FSU].
Retrieved from http://myfsu.ferris.edu
F.A. Davis Company. (2008). Setting Up a Virtual Group. Authors.
Kearney-Nunnery, R. (2008). Advancing your career: Concepts of professional nursing (4th
ed.). F. A. Davis Company, Philadelphia.