Assignment 7 (Brianne Wingate)

Last Thursday evening, the Joint Chapter Management Team of my sorority met. Joint CMT is comprised of the President, Vice Presidents, and Directors of our chapter. The directors work under the VPs in different "departments"- Communications, Social Standards, Programming, Finance, Membership, Foundation (Philanthropy), and Panhellenic. As the director of e-communications, my attendance was necessary. The meeting took place face-to-face and we shared the display of the agenda. As with any sizable group of individuals, we had certain issues that came up during the meeting.

The first was the formation of in-groups, as discussed in Bos, et al. They claim that the formation of in-groups in large groups is a common occurrence, and we were certainly no exception. One might expect that in-groups would form based on department. However, ours are largely based on pledge class (or year of initiation). We tend to group ourselves this way because we feel most comfortable with the girls who have had the different experiences of Delta Gamma at the same time we have. As a result, we usually agree with other members of our pledge class on issues ranging from how we should plan out our next philanthropy event to what our Slope Day shirts should say.

Our second issue was the arrangement of users, as discussed in Scott, et al. The meeting took place in a room with several couches, a few chairs, and lots of floor space. Joint CMT members usually sit based on 1) where their closest friends are sitting and 2) where the most comfortable seat is. If they have to choose between sitting with their friends on the floor or with people they do not know as well on the couch, they tend to choose their friends. However, if they have to choose between sitting with their friends on the floor or sitting on a couch or chair relatively alone, I find that they tend to choose the comfortable seat. This arrangement of users is somewhat problematic, as I will discuss later.

Our final concept taken from readings was the "Mechanics of Collaboration", taken from Scott, et al. As I mentioned before, we shared a display of an agenda, which was arranged by VP, then the directors that are under her. This specifies which officer will address which issues, and increases workspace awareness.

Our arrangement made it easy to get ideas from other members to enhance our projects, get input on problem solving, and estimate approval for possible programming functions since many different sub-groups of DG as a whole are represented. Difficulties were found in filling in holes for members who are not able to be at the meeting and arranging ourselves comfortably while at the same time remaining productive. To improve the experience, I would have absent members submit their announcements prior to missing the meeting and have seating by sub-groups (not in-groups).