Puzzling Out Leadership Styles: An Educational Group Activity for
Teaching and Learning about Leadership Styles and Group Dynamics in
Team Work
Andrew Hund, M.A., Ph.D (Corresponding author) The United Arab Emirates University
College of Humanities and Social Science Department of Sociology
PO Box 15551
Al Ain, The United Arab Emirates E-mail: [email protected]
Karen Knaus, Ph.D
University of Colorado Denver College of Liberal Arts and Sciences Department of Chemistry
Campus Box 194 P.O. Box 173364 Denver, CO 80217-3364
E-mail: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
This pragmatic educational activity helps participants understand various leadership styles and group interactions as they influence effectiveness of team work towards the accomplishment of a puzzle-solving task. The activity can easily be facilitated in one to two hours and helps participants understand how team work can be assisted or hindered based on various leadership styles and group interactions and dynamics. The small group activities are not applicable to all leadership styles, group interactions and situations, but they do serve as valuable educational experiences that encourage participants to learn how factors such as decentralized power and cooperation may promote a team-building and influence task completion and team work. Furthermore, the suggested educational activity and research endeavor proposed herein provides a unique classroom active-learning exercise for teaching and learning about leadership styles and group dynamics in team work. Larger overarching themes relevant to this work include balance of power and cooperation in teams and organizational leadership.
Keywords: Leadership styles, small group interactions, team building, team work, task completion, organizational leadership.
1. INTRODUCTION
The educational group activity described in this paper involves having participants attempt a group puzzle-solving task under differing instructions that encourage participants’ understanding and perceptions of how various leadership styles and/or group interactions may influence task completion. In addition, the group activity teaches participants various ways that team leaders and members may function and/or work together while approaching a group task. Furthermore, the goal of the learning activity and research approach described in this paper is to facilitate the learning of various leadership styles and group dynamics, which will result in a greater understanding of factors that influence the effective functioning of team work. A means for achieving these goals is an experiential research approach that facilitates the comprehension of structural and dynamical aspects of groups in order to understand functional versus dysfunctional group models that may be encountered by individuals while they work with teams.
In group work exercises, frequently the objective is to enlighten participants on what it means to be a “team member” rather than the “process by which the team achieves its purpose” (Brandler 1988: 99). Rogers (1969) claimed that groups have the ability to assist participants in gaining empathy and increasing communication that enable them to understand the processes involved in being a member of a group. In addition, O’Dee (1995) noted that “group work offers a forum in which participants can explore how to challenge inequitable or oppressive environments and practices” (p. 168). Thus, focusing on an understanding of the social processes involved in an actor’s participation or lack of participation in a group influences group dynamics and is a critical component of assisting participants’ understanding of varied group dynamics and leadership styles while simultaneously enhancing pragmatic skills for working within a group setting in the classroom (Salmon, Getzel, and Kurland 1991). Moreover, exposing students to various group dynamics and leadership styles is essential to achieving an intellectual understanding of the complexities of group work. Additionally, group discussions assist students by stimulating relevant experiences, which in turn are used to increase awareness and build their understanding of group work (Franks, Bransford, and Auble 1982). The collaborative active-learning activity proposed in this research has the potential to achieve these classroom learning objectives more efficiently than possible using the standard didactic teaching model.
The educational process described in this paper involves the use of puzzles constructed under different circumstances to assist in the understanding of particular leadership styles as they influence group dynamics. Puzzles have been used in a limited capacity to illustrate group formulations. For example, Brandler (1988) performed a jigsaw puzzle exercise that divided the class into two groups of six to eight students who solved identical puzzles. The remaining students in the classroom were given explicit instructions on being observers and asked to explain how the two different groups were able to solve the puzzles. Specifically, the student observers were asked to look for the emergence of leadership and organization of the group which were used in solving the puzzles. The educational process and research described in this paper builds upon the earlier study conducted by Brandler (1988) by expanding the number of groups used (n = 8) and integrating the observer and participant roles. In addition, the groups/teams are provided with explicit instructions on the division of labor and leadership styles for their group. Expanding the number of groups has had the effect of increasing the variety of leadership styles and organizational dynamics experienced by participants, which may enhances participants’ reflection and understanding of group work as well as enrich future classroom discussion of leadership styles and group dynamics. Hence, the research question addressed is:
Does the participation and discussion of various leadership styles and group dynamics involved in a puzzle-solving activity influence the understanding and perceptions of leadership styles and group dynamics?
2. DESCRIPTION OF PROCESS OF GROUP/TEAM SELECTION
The active-learning group activity involves the formation of eight (8) puzzle-solving teams/groups with at least five (5) persons per group. Each team/group will be provided with a different set of instructions for solving a puzzle task (see section below). Selection of groups involves the random assignment of forty individuals to one (1) of eight (8) teams/groups. Random assignment of eight, five person groups can be accomplished by random number generation and assignment. For groups one through five (1 - 5), members will be assigned a number from one to five (1 - 5). In groups one (1) through three (3), one member is selected to serve as group facilitator/leader (e.g., groups one and two) or as a group participant (e.g., group 3). For groups four (4) and five (5), two (2) members are selected at random with group four having two leaders and group five being divided into a subgroup of two. Groups six (6), seven (7), and eight (8) will have no additional selections.
3. DESCRIPTION OF INSTRUCTIONS FOR GROUPS/TEAMS
Instructions for all eight teams/groups can be shown on an overhead projector and then participants are asked to assemble into their respective groups and group areas to complete
the puzzle-solving task. Participants selected as facilitators/leaders of each group will acquire the puzzles (e.g., groups 1 - 5). Since groups/teams numbered six through eight (6 - 8) do not have a designated facilitator/leader their puzzle will have been previously distributed to their group work area with instructions. Group eight which will not be provided with instructions. Puzzles have been previously labeled with a number between one and eight (1 - 8) corresponding to each puzzle-solving team/group. Groups with additional instructions one through seven (1 - 7) will be provided with the following instructions – the group facilitator(s)/leader or group appointed member will read the instructions prior to opening the puzzle. The following list is the various compositions of the groups and an overview of the various leadership styles/group dynamics that guide group/team members’ puzzle solving strategy.
After random number selection participants will be informed of which group they will participate. Those selected as a team facilitator/leader will be handed the puzzle and informed to read the instructions ahead of time and communicate the instructions to their respective team members. Once the instructions have been communicated by the leaders to the teams, groups will be given 20 minutes to complete the puzzle-solving task. Each puzzle should be the same size and contain the same number of pieces. Previously, commercially available puzzles were used for the activity that were 12.5 inches by 15 inches (31.75 X 38.10 cm) in size and contained 100 pieces. The puzzles featured images of animals (e.g., cats, raccoons, rabbits, and horses in a natural setting). Upon completion of the allotted puzzle-solving time (20 minutes), each group, starting with group number one (1) through group number eight (8) are asked to respond to five (5) semi-structured interview questions. The semi-structured interview questions are answered in the large classroom setting before all group participants (n = 40) and all participants (n = 40) involved in the educational activity.
3.1Group Instructions
3.1.1 Group One -- The randomly selected facilitator reads the instructions then instructs the four others that they may only watch as the facilitator solves the puzzle independently. The four members must not contribute to the puzzle-solving process through any type of communication or action. In other words, the members may not contribute to the solving of the puzzle. The role of team members in group one involved observing the facilitator solve the puzzle independently.
3.1.2 Group Two -- The randomly selected facilitator reads the instructions then instructs each of the members where to place a piece one at a time. The team members may not select a piece nor suggest anything about the piece without being told in advance where to place it. The facilitator must wait for the team member to place the puzzle piece as instructed before selecting another piece and person to place an additional puzzle piece. Each of the four members must take turns placing a puzzle piece before starting over again.
3.1.3 Group Three – The randomly selected leader/facilitator places each puzzle piece only after the other four members of the team have come to a unanimous consensus on selection and placement of each piece. Specifically, the four members must select a piece then vote on each piece before instructing the leader/facilitator where to place the piece. After each puzzle piece is placed the group starts the process of selecting a new puzzle piece, placement of the puzzle piece and the associated voting process over again. This iterative cycle is repeated until all the puzzle pieces have been selected and placed. In the event that consensus cannot be achieved on the selection and placement of an individual puzzle piece, the team must select a new puzzle piece, placement of the piece and start the voting process over again.
3.1.4 Group Four -- The two randomly selected facilitators/leaders both read the puzzle-solving instructions. The two facilitators are asked to attempt to solve the puzzle and place more pieces of the puzzle correctly than each other. The two facilitators must recruit one of the others team members to count their pieces correctly placed. Aside from occasionally
being a selected as a puzzle piece counter the other team members serve as observers and may not provide assistance/feedback on the puzzle-solving construction process.
3.1.5 Group Five – The two members selected at random to serve as leaders/facilitators form a subgroup as do the remaining three team members. In other words, the puzzle-solving task is divided and each of the two subgroups can only work with their half of the puzzle. The two subgroups must work independently of each other as they attempt to correctly solve more of the puzzle than the other subgroup. Members of the two subgroups may not talk, work together or coordinate on solving the puzzle-solving task. In addition, members of the two subgroups may not exchange puzzle pieces.
3.1.6 Group Six -- All five members of the team are instructed to discuss the various strategies on how the puzzle can be solved. The five members of the team may not place any puzzle pieces, nor open the puzzle box and examine pieces.
3.1.7 Group Seven – This group is provided with instructions that all members must work together and attempt to correctly solve the puzzle as quickly as possible. Members of the team are instructed that they should consider all group members as equals and they may freely come up with a coordinated plan to select and place puzzle pieces together with the goal of solving the puzzle as efficiently as possible.
3.1.8 Group Eight – This group is provided with a puzzle but no instructions on how to approach the puzzle-solving task.
4. DESCRIPTION OF SUGGESTED RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS AND DATA COLLECTION STRATEGY
For those interested in gathering data and conducting research with the puzzle-solving educational activity described in this paper, a research design/approach has been suggested and provided. Specifically, it is suggested that data collection includes using a combination of two previously developed research instruments including a pre and post survey instrument and a semi-structured interview questionnaire. The pre and post survey instrument consists of sixteen (16) questions. Specifically, the pre-test survey contains thirteen (13) questions from the Baylor College of Medicine “Team Learning in Medical Education” scale and three (3) basic demographic questions (age, race/ethnicity, and major). It is suggested that the pre-test survey should be administered approximately one (1) week before the active-learning puzzle-solving group activity.
It is suggested that the group discussion of the puzzle-solving educational activity be tape-recorded with a micro-cassette recorder and the group discussion would serve as the semi-structured interview that can be later transcribed for the collection of qualitative research data. Furthermore, participants should be requested not to provide individual’s names during the group discussion and interview. In the event that the name of a participant is mentioned during the interview discussion process, it is recommended to expunge this information from the interview transcripts. The intention in design of semi-structured interview questions is to assist participants to share their respective understandings and perceptions of various leadership styles and group dynamics experienced with the entire group of participants involved in the education and research activity. In addition, it is suggested that following the participants’ involvement in the puzzle solving exercise, a post-test survey be administered. The post-post-test survey has been designed to include forty-one (41) questions comprised of thirteen (13) questions from the Baylor College of Medicine scale, three (3) demographic questions, and twenty-five (25) question addressing the specific leadership styles and group dynamics related to the educational puzzle-solving group activity.
5. DESCRIPTION OF SUGGESTED DATA ANALYSIS AND DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN
The pre-test and post-test survey data can be coded and entered into the SPSS© or NVIVO™ statistical analysis programs. Participants can be identified with code names
assigned using an ID Number and group number. No other identifying information should be collected on surveys, audiotapes or semi-structured interviews. No master list of individually identifiable data should exist, because no names will be elicited from participants. Completed surveys and audio tapes can be stored in a locked file cabinet in the researcher’s work or home. The audio tapes can be transcribed and verified by a research investigator. No one else should have access to the tapes. Transcripts should not include identifying information other than the code names as group numbers. Upon entering the survey data in SPSS and interview data into NVIVO, all completed surveys and micro-cassette recorder tapes should be destroyed either by a paper shredder or by physically destroying the tapes after data has been entered into data analysis software programs. Destruction of paper copies of survey instruments, data collected and interview tapes should occur within three months of data collection. A comparative analysis of pre-test and post-pre-test can be analyzed with the SPSS statistical software program. Recorded semi-structured interviews can be transcribed and placed in the NVIVO program for analysis of qualitative interview data.
6. CONCLUSION
The educational puzzle-solving group activity described in this paper provides a valuable active-learning group experience that teaches participants about various leadership styles and group dynamics that influence task completion. In addition, the group activity provides a unique forum for enhancing participants’ understandings and perceptions of various leadership styles and group interactions as they relate to team work. The larger themes addressed in this educational activity and suggested research approach includes the necessary balance of power and cooperation in teams that likely serve larger organizations. Furthermore, the educational activity explained in this paper provides a valuable contribution to both business management and organizational leadership education and research programs.
REFERENCES
Brandler, Sondra. 1988. The Jigsaw Puzzle: An experiment in understanding group process. Social Work with Groups. 11(1/2), 99-109.
Franks, J. J. Bransford, and P. Auble. 1982. The Activation and Utilization of Knowledge. In Handbook of Research Methods in Human Memory and Cognition, C. R. PuE, ed., pp. 395-425. New York: Academic Press.
O’Dee, Margaret. 1995. “Using groupwork methods in social work education.” Groupwork. 8(2): 166-176.
Rogers, C.R. 1969. Freedom to Learn. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Robert Salmon, George Getzel, and Roselle Kurland. "The Neophyte, The Natural, The Thinker, and The Star," Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 5(1), 1991.
