Week Two discussion 1 replies. Please reply to the TWO students discussion post.

200+ word response each to the TWO students discussion posts. 

Branden Davis

Group Communication and Mission Success

I learned a lot about teamwork from the flight deck team while I served in the Navy as an Aviation Boatswain’s Mate. The flight deck had people with different ranks, duties, personalities, and experience levels, all working toward one shared goal. What shaped our teamwork most was the idea that safety and mission success depended on each person doing their part. Johnson and Johnson (2017) describe interdependence as the belief that group members cannot succeed unless other members succeed as well (p. 109). On a flight deck, that was not just a theory. If one person missed a step or did not communicate, the whole operation could be affected at once.Positive interdependence shows why individual accountability mattered so much. Each person had a duty, but no duty existed alone. We had to see how our actions touched those around us. Rank and experience made it hard for some to ask questions or challenge things that seemed wrong. The team worked best when everyone knew that speaking up protected the mission, rather than weakened authority. Positive interdependence means each member must do their best and also help others do their best (Johnson & Johnson, 2017, p. 109).

Communication was also key to how the team worked. The environment was loud, fast, and dangerous, so messages had to be crystal clear. Johnson and Johnson (2017) say that group members send, receive, interpret, and guess about messages all at once (pp. 140–141). So, communication is more than giving orders. A leader might think a message was clear, but the receiver could have a different idea because of noise, stress, body language, or past experience. In my view, leaders must verify understanding and not assume that giving a direction ends the conversation.

The main lesson for leaders is that clear expectations and trust must go hand in hand. Leaders should set the goal, explain each person’s duties, and build a space where people can voice concerns without fear. Team members must listen, confirm what they heard, and own how their actions affect the group. Later, when I ran five Blue Raven offices with 50 to 100 employees, the scene was very different, yet the same principle held true. Sharing a goal did not automatically mean everyone knew how to collaborate. Good teamwork needs leaders to watch how messages land and to make sure everyone sees that their success depends on each other (Johnson & Johnson, 2017, pp. 109, 140–141).

References

Johnson, D. H., & Johnson, F. P. (2017).  Joining together: Group theory and group skills (12th ed.). Pearson.

Jabrian Johnson

Understanding Group Dynamics Through Shared Goals, Communication, and Trust

Throughout my career in the military and human resources, I have worked with many different teams, and one thing I have learned is that just because everyone is working toward the same goal does not mean everyone is on the same page. One experience that comes to mind is when I was working as an HR Manager at Sellers & Associates. We had just been awarded a new contract and needed to hire and onboard approximately 55 employees in a very short period of time. While everyone understood what needed to happen, each department had its own priorities. Recruiting was focused on finding qualified candidates, operations needed employees ready to begin working, and HR had to make sure all employment and onboarding requirements were completed. Looking back, this was a good example of what Johnson and Johnson (2017) describe as social interdependence, where the actions of individuals and groups directly affect whether everyone reaches a common goal (pp. 88–93).

One of the biggest things that influenced our team's effectiveness was understanding that we needed each other to be successful. We could recruit all 55 employees, but if they were not properly onboarded, we still had a problem. The same applied to operations. They could have everything ready for employees to start, but without qualified candidates and completed paperwork, they could not move forward. Johnson and Johnson (2017) discuss positive social interdependence and how cooperation helps groups accomplish shared goals (pp. 93–101). I saw this firsthand because there was no way one department could have completed this project without the others. We had to be willing to communicate, adjust our priorities when necessary, and understand that what happened in one department affected everyone else.

Communication was another major factor. With such a short turnaround, there was very little room for misunderstandings or delays. There were times when departments had different expectations about how quickly something should be completed or what needed to take priority. From an HR standpoint, I understood the urgency, but I also knew we could not overlook required processes simply because we were working against a deadline. I had to make sure expectations were clear, provide updates, and address concerns as they came up. Johnson and Johnson (2017) explain the importance of how information is communicated and understood within groups (pp. 140–145). This experience reminded me that communication is not just about sending an email or telling someone what needs to happen. It is making sure everyone understands what is expected, why it matters, and how their part affects the bigger picture.

Something else that stood out to me from this week's reading was Robinson and Rose's (2007) discussion of relational awareness. They explain that when problems arise within a group, we have to look at how people interact with one another rather than automatically assuming one person is responsible (p. 21). I can relate to this because when something was delayed during our hiring process, it would have been easy to point fingers at recruiting, HR, or operations. However, the issue was not always that someone failed to do their job. Sometimes information had not been communicated, priorities were different, or one department was waiting on something from another. I have learned that placing blame does not necessarily solve anything. As a leader, I would rather understand what caused the issue and determine how we can prevent it from happening again.

This also connects to Robinson and Rose's (2007) discussion about addressing the root cause of a problem instead of just focusing on what we see happening (p. 22). For example, if an employee's start date was delayed, the easiest response would have been to tell everyone to move faster. However, that would not have addressed why the delay happened in the first place. Was paperwork missing? Was someone waiting on an approval? Was there confusion about who was responsible for the next step? Those were the types of questions that needed to be asked. In my experience, sometimes the smallest breakdown in communication can create a much bigger problem. I believe leaders have a responsibility to identify those issues rather than continuing to put pressure on employees without addressing what is preventing them from being successful.

The biggest takeaway for me is that effective teams need more than a common goal. They need trust, communication, accountability, and leaders who are willing to listen and make adjustments when something is not working. Robinson and Rose (2007) discuss how small changes can make a significant difference in how a group functions over time (p. 23). I agree with this because sometimes something as simple as clarifying responsibilities, providing a quick update, or having a conversation can prevent an issue from becoming much bigger. We were able to meet an aggressive staffing requirement because we understood that our individual responsibilities were connected to the overall success of the organization. Now that I work in labor relations, I see many of these same dynamics when working with employees and management. Everyone may have different perspectives, priorities, and expectations, but that does not mean they cannot work toward a common resolution. For me, effective leadership is about recognizing those differences, keeping communication open, and making sure people understand that working together is just as important as getting the job done (Johnson & Johnson, 2017, pp. 129–135).

References

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (2017).  Joining together: Group theory and group skills (12th ed.). Pearson.

Robinson, G., & Rose, M. (2007).  Teams for a new generation: A facilitator's field guide. AuthorHouse.