My Contribution To The Group Project

When we first began working as a collective none of us were very sure about how to proceed; we knew that for this to work, everyone would need to take their role within the group, but the problem was in finding what those roles should be. As we were in a very small group, everyone’s full input was needed throughout the process as we realised early on that if this did not happen then there would be a large proportion of the group not taking part.

In larger groups, having someone not taking part would not necessarily be that important, however, with ours, we would be at a serious disadvantage. Luckily every one of group was very committed to producing the best piece that we could, and this involved not letting each other down. This work ethic allowed us to have many in-depth discussions into the possible interpretations and meanings of our work, and so we developed a very complex understanding of what we were actually trying to communicate, and, to us, gave the work much greater meaning.

In the beginning stages, we all took on very similar working roles. This was not very productive as often the same task was performed three times over. For example, all doing research on the same subject meant that a lot of information was being regurgitated, and so time was being wasted on unnecessary work. Although it seems like an obvious course of action, we began giving people dedicated tasks at the end of each rehearsal.

Get quality help now

Writer Lyla

Verified

Proficient in: Communication

5 (876)

“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

This allowed us to know exactly what other members of the group would be bringing to the next meet, and so we were able to structure our own work around this knowledge.

My Contribution To The Group Project

One of the most difficult parts of coming to the devising process was learning how to constructively working in a group over a long period of time. While we were used to being part of a cast, we had always had the influence of a director to keep things fresh and to solve conflicts. This time we would have to figure it all out for ourselves. Before we tried to begin doing any work we first sat down and discussed and agreed upon a number of ‘ground rules’ that we would be working to during our devising. These rules were not there to keep members of the group constrained, but were there so that we knew what was expected of us during this process. Much of what was decided came from common sense, but it was very useful to have everyone’s contribution as this created an open atmosphere where we could voice hopes and concerns about working in the group. These rules were written down, but they were never referred to afterwards as we all respected them throughout the process.

In this early stage we had not had the chance to develop the group skills that would be so important to the completion of the project. In order to gain these skills we began working on simple tasks such as constructing short scenes and improvising around the stimulus material. These exercises did not contribute to the final performance, however, the processes of constructing them allowed us to work in the same group situations that we would be working in throughout the devising process, and gave us an idea of the kinds of concessions and cooperation needed for the success of group work.

This way of working, was very intense, and although it did produce results, the group was not it’s without conflicts. Because of the open nature of the group we never had disagreements over the actual work; if there was a problem with what was being produced, we sat down and tried to work out alternatives, and it was this way of working that probably stopped a number of arguments. However, this was a very stressful atmosphere, especially as we came closer to the night of performance. On one occasion we found ourselves arguing over petty problems, and this began interfering with the work. At the time we decided to abandon the rehearsal and spend the evening relaxing, not thinking about the play! Thankfully this was the only occasion that we actually argued over the work and so the only time that our work was interrupted in this way.

Although I have said that the amount of time spent together was the cause of disputes, this also created a very tight bond between the members of the group, and it was this bond that was crucial to the success of the final performance. This closeness that we had developed worked to our advantage on a number of levels. When developing ideas we were able to understand the thought track of other members very quickly, and so very little explaining was needed when presenting new concepts.

But also, when we came to the final performance, we knew that we were able to rely on the abilities of other group members. In the performance, not only did we know what we were meant to be doing, we also knew exactly what other members of the cast were supposed to be doing. This allowed us to precisely plan our reactions and meant that (epically with the more physical elements) we were able to rely on other cast members to doing exactly what they supposed to be doing. This level of trust that had been developing for a number of weeks meant that we did not have to worry about the performance of other members of the group. Without the development of group work in the early stages we would not have been able to work effectively within the group, and possibly the very simple devising tasks would not have been achieved.