Social Sciences: Group Analysis Essay (Essay Sample)

[UNIVERSITY SOCIAL COMMUNITY GROUP ANALYSIS]
By
Insert Your Name
Presented to
Instructor’s Name, Course
Institution Name, Location
Date Due
University Social Community Group Analysis
Introduction
The paper illuminates on a university social community context of a group known as Applegate Partnership. Qualitative methods have been used so as to deliver a rich and extensive description concerning the partnership story. The story takes place in Northern California and Southwest Oregon in a watershed that covers 500,000 acres. The community, which comprises of both human and natural constituents is sophisticated and diverse.
The timber industry, natural resource agencies, conservation groups and other groups that cooperated to enhance the ecosystem diversity, health, economic as well as community stability were brought together when the partnership was established. Further, the group organized a meeting that led to the selection of a Board of Directors. These were the visionary leaders of the group, in charge of setting goals and objectives. The Board of Members were profoundly inspired, energized, equipped with knowledge and skill, which contributed to the success of the partnership. In addition, the leaders focused on common interest while carrying out their vision and as a result other group members were ready and willing to offer their help when necessary as well as support them (CITATION Hog80 \p 23 \l 1033 (Hogan & Champagne, 1980, p. 23).
Initially, there were some oversights, which continuously haunted them but they were able to manoeuvre through the challenging times. Their extraordinary talent, experience, extra efforts in their work and skill explains part of their success. Moreover, the fortune in discovering the right group "chemistry" was profound.
The group members upheld a robust character, integrity and other skills that helped to nurture trust among them and aided in resolving conflicts when they arose. The members spent a lot of time together, both work and non-work, which was a way of engaging in trust-building activities as well as dissolving any stereotypes that were held previously. Trust became a fundamental virtue in the group that was used to suppress conflicts because they felt conflicts would undermine the built trust. However, conflicts are inevitable though over time the frequency, duration and intensity eased. In addition, volunteer facilitators came in handy to train the group members on managing conflict CITATION Hog80 \p 25 \l 1033 (Hogan & Champagne, 1980, p. 25)
The context of the partnership in the community is significant from the beginning. The group community underwent both social and demographic changes that challenged the traditional way of life. However, the groups’ economic and social diversity as well as the all-embracing ties to local centres as well as other communities have been a pillar in enabling the community to adapt proactively to the adjustments. The people in the community have a strong attachment to the group due to the unity they portray as well as the initiative to protect the natural resources. The group community has ample dimensions in terms of relationships, social systems and geography that offer a distinctive setting for the group CITATION Whi84 \p 45 \l 1033 (White, 1984, p. 45).
Features that are considered to contribute to the success of the partnership include: economic and social diversity, social and environmental activism, the capacity at the community level together with the local leadership networked profoundly, widespread knowledge of the commitment to planning and resource management and contributions in terms of leadership and resources sourced from non-profit organizations.
The group has recorded several community outreaches that are popular and recognised. For example, the group provided a platform that offers a neutral forum for the community that is used for sharing information, ideas and local history.
The group has portrayed strengths in terms of improving relationships, building understandings and managing conflict. Obstacles to the success of the group are way beyond the control of the partnership. Some of them are market forces, social inequality and institutional barriers CITATION Hog80 \p 26 \l 1033 (Hogan & Champagne, 1980, p. 26)Analytical DiscussionAbout the group
The Applegate is located in the southwest Oregon and Northern California and encompasses 500,000 acres of land. The group owns residential lots, hobby farms, federal lands, industrial forests and small woodlands among others. Those involved in the partnership aim at defending ecological integrity in the community. Within the 275,000 acres of the Applegate Adaptive management region, the Applegate watershed covers around 60% of the total area. A 10% is allocated to federal lands as Late Successional Reserves and Wilderness.
The watershed is located in Klamath Geological Province, which was formed over 250 million years ago. The geological formation of the watershed bridged the plant migration and the Cascades and coastal ranges providing a high genetic diversity.Structure of the group and Task behaviour and maintenance behaviour within the group
A group structure is a framework that defines the relationship among members. The primary aspects of a group structure are norms, values, status differentials and communication patterns. One of the primary values within the group is trust. Within all group dynamics as well as human interactions, trust is a paramount concept. According to Aristotle, trust is an essential factor in communication. He emphasized the importance of goodwill and character in the manner that people treat each other. These are very relevant to date, more so they are hallmarks to the Applegate partnership Board membersCITATION Rai82 \p 29 \l 1033 (Raiffa, 1982, p. 29).
In Applegate, the partnership built a social space that allowed the discovery of relationship building and commonalities as well as dissolved the past held misconceptions and stereotypes. Over time, the Board members were in a position to predict how their members would act after cultivating a kind of predictive knowledge. As time went by, it was evident the group was in unity, and they were working towards a common goal. As a result, there was an expansion of the internal relationships beyond the meetings as they would hold community potlucks, walk miles of forest trails, drink beer and observe planes together. The group appeared together on radio shows, geographical distant forums and panelsCITATION Pfe76 \p 30 \l 1033 (Pfeiffer & Jones, 1976, p. 30).
Over time, they could relatively predict the subjects to avoid, who would speak and when, effects of a particular kind of a talk and so on. In addition, they created a free interacting environment where they could freely share their distresses regarding constituency groups, they learnt lobbying outside the meeting room and gradually saw themselves as one unit. In turn, the enmity that once existed was progressively replaced by robust trust.
Trust became an inevitable word in their subculture. It saturated their internal discussions, press releases and official videotape. They reminded each other often of trustworthiness anytime an argument arose. Trust is a word that can never miss in any meeting held in Applegate, and a time it is even overused. In presentations done by Applegate members as they would travel a lot all over the world, they focused on the importance of trustCITATION Pen91 \p 67 \l 1033 (Pendergast, 1991, p. 67).
Trust is tenuous due to the inconsistencies that surround the process. The differences resulted due to minor conflicts among members, which tested their trust. For instance, in one of the meetings, one of the board members announced that a new lawsuit was filed. Another member disapproved the plaintiff who filed. It became a verbal "return fire”, but it was a reminder that there were limits to being in the group.Stages of development of the group
The Applegate Partnership was on the right track from its early beginnings, though some may term it as sheer luck. The group had leaders of vision who made good decisions regarding mitigating conflicts of interest and broadening the base of participation. The group was led by Jack Shipley and Jim Neal. They met severally and eventually identified the mutual interests. Both started building networks with trusted associates from environmental groups, the industry and the agencies. After a while, there was a circulation that outlined the tenets, which was a way to find interested parties. The interested parties, in the long run, met, and from then it was precise that that was a rare opportunity that needed to be acted upon. In a second meeting, nine board members were selected to represent all sides. Over time, there were replacements, resignations and additions CITATION Pen91 \p 43 \l 1033 (Pendergast, 1991, p. 43).
The group was faced with severe challenges like misunderstandings among group members, but with the help of facilitators, there was tolerance of each other in the thorny moments. They would remind members of the ground rules when they were broken and restored order when tempers flared. The group was helped to work out conflict in productive ways.
The chemistry between the group members profoundly grew, and all members knew their roles. They were willing to work towards success and achieve the set goals. The partnership performance owes to the motivation, skills and talents present within the group members. They grew to be competent and decision makers. Leaders too channel all efforts to the group so as to maintain performanceCITATION Fol84 \p 78 \l 1033 (Folberg & Taylor, 1984, p. 78).
Roles played by executive members of the group (Team role behaviour)
My role in the group was to organize events that would boost interacti...