Very creative application assignment, Lisa. I believe there is one main goal for this team: survival. Because of this, and especially in light of the last few episodes, I am not sure I agree that Rick is running an effective team because many have (spoiler alert) died. Interpersonal conflict is one of the main reasons for their recent problems. Do you think this team needs to work on a shared identity (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005)?
Hill (1995) notes that a successful manager needs to manage relationships external to the group but internal to the organization, and I do think Rick does a good job of this with Hershel's clan. Finally, I believe Majcharzak et al.'s (2007) theoretical extensions to TMS could apply to this type of group. For example, the authors contend that credibility can be replaced by trust through action (p. 154). In the Walking Dead example, showing competence in different areas (zombie slaying?) could allow sift trust to emerge. In other words, trust "is continuously created and recreated through action" (p. 154).
I am going to mark this down as one of my finest teaching moments. Dr. Weintraub would be so proud.
Haha! Thanks, Courtney! I shall also mark this as one of my best academic achievements.
Yes, very good points about Rick perhaps losing control of the group, especially with the loss of a key character, the one who most challenged Rick's authority (major spoiler alert!). However, those that have died all seemed to meet their demise by defying Rick; until recently when Rick seemed to be doubting himself and perhaps subconsciously transferring that doubt to the group. What I find most interesting in relation to our readings and this group's cohesiveness, or emerging lack thereof, is if the trust in Rick continue, given recent events. Trust is a major if not the most important part of this group. I should've consulted Al on TMS, as Majchazak et al's (2007) quote is definitely applicaple to the Walking Dead group. That's really all they have. Given that, it's apparent that TMS does exist and will become more prevelant.
I foresee this group on the way to completing the five steps of failure (Levy, 2001). They would appear to be in stage two - passive resentment (Levy, 2001). Rick will ultimately be blamed for this major fracture, whether the ultimate demise is his fault or not. Perhaps this is another example of TMS, as the other members will always attach events to him and their trust in his leadership.
I love it! Who has time for TV? I have never seen this show, and I dislike zombies very much, so there is no chance that I will get to see what happens in the next season. I do have a question though about zombies and TMS - do they even have the capability of developing TM? As for the "trust" mentioned by Courtney, do you think this is an "ad hoc" group where swift trust has been created as depicted in Majchazak et al. (2007)?
Adriana, I love this! There are a few things I cannot live with out. The Walking Dead and Breaking bad are two of them (no Zombies in Breaking Bad, so you might like that one). It's not the zombies who are the group, it's the living who formed the group to combat the zombies. Zombies have no chance of developing TMS or forming a structured group. If they did, Rick and the rest of his group should give up now. They have, however, started forming herds. The group of the living, yes, is an ad hoc group where swift trust was formed through competence and had to be for survival.
I already left an audio comment on your VT, but who knew how much Zombies could teach us, the cream of the communication crop, about TMS? I didn't get enough about Rick and the group (clan?), and not having seen one episode of The Walking Dead, I have to guess that the action and skillsets by the members is diverse enough to keep them /Rick alive.
Guess I now have a reason to DVR "TWD on AMC" over Bravo or Nick Jr. programming during that time. Thank you!
Very creative application assignment, Lisa. I believe there is one main goal for this team: survival. Because of this, and especially in light of the last few episodes, I am not sure I agree that Rick is running an effective team because many have (spoiler alert) died. Interpersonal conflict is one of the main reasons for their recent problems. Do you think this team needs to work on a shared identity (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005)?
ReplyDeleteHill (1995) notes that a successful manager needs to manage relationships external to the group but internal to the organization, and I do think Rick does a good job of this with Hershel's clan. Finally, I believe Majcharzak et al.'s (2007) theoretical extensions to TMS could apply to this type of group. For example, the authors contend that credibility can be replaced by trust through action (p. 154). In the Walking Dead example, showing competence in different areas (zombie slaying?) could allow sift trust to emerge. In other words, trust "is continuously created and recreated through action" (p. 154).
I am going to mark this down as one of my finest teaching moments. Dr. Weintraub would be so proud.
Haha! Thanks, Courtney! I shall also mark this as one of my best academic achievements.
ReplyDeleteYes, very good points about Rick perhaps losing control of the group, especially with the loss of a key character, the one who most challenged Rick's authority (major spoiler alert!). However, those that have died all seemed to meet their demise by defying Rick; until recently when Rick seemed to be doubting himself and perhaps subconsciously transferring that doubt to the group. What I find most interesting in relation to our readings and this group's cohesiveness, or emerging lack thereof, is if the trust in Rick continue, given recent events. Trust is a major if not the most important part of this group. I should've consulted Al on TMS, as Majchazak et al's (2007) quote is definitely applicaple to the Walking Dead group. That's really all they have. Given that, it's apparent that TMS does exist and will become more prevelant.
I foresee this group on the way to completing the five steps of failure (Levy, 2001). They would appear to be in stage two - passive resentment (Levy, 2001). Rick will ultimately be blamed for this major fracture, whether the ultimate demise is his fault or not. Perhaps this is another example of TMS, as the other members will always attach events to him and their trust in his leadership.
Lisa,
ReplyDeleteI love it! Who has time for TV? I have never seen this show, and I dislike zombies very much, so there is no chance that I will get to see what happens in the next season. I do have a question though about zombies and TMS - do they even have the capability of developing TM? As for the "trust" mentioned by Courtney, do you think this is an "ad hoc" group where swift trust has been created as depicted in Majchazak et al. (2007)?
Great way to engage your audience!
Adriana
Adriana, I love this! There are a few things I cannot live with out. The Walking Dead and Breaking bad are two of them (no Zombies in Breaking Bad, so you might like that one). It's not the zombies who are the group, it's the living who formed the group to combat the zombies. Zombies have no chance of developing TMS or forming a structured group. If they did, Rick and the rest of his group should give up now. They have, however, started forming herds. The group of the living, yes, is an ad hoc group where swift trust was formed through competence and had to be for survival.
ReplyDeleteHi Lisa,
ReplyDeleteI already left an audio comment on your VT, but who knew how much Zombies could teach us, the cream of the communication crop, about TMS? I didn't get enough about Rick and the group (clan?), and not having seen one episode of The Walking Dead, I have to guess that the action and skillsets by the members is diverse enough to keep them /Rick alive.
Guess I now have a reason to DVR "TWD on AMC" over Bravo or Nick Jr. programming during that time. Thank you!