The second game turned out much better than the first game that we played. When we met to play the first round of the game, everyone was a little bit shy and didn't really want to speak up. Although it seemed fine for everyone, this caused us to just agree on the first solution anyone thought of because we were too uncomfortable to speak up. Our meeting for game 2 went much better. We were a little more comfortable with each other and actually bounced ideas off of each other, rejecting some and accepting others. We actually discussed tactics and what we all planned to do for each turn. While we were playing, our different communication styles really showed. Logan and Adam are definitely logical thinkers. When we would discuss what to do next, and they would think logically when trying to make decisions, which really made the rest of us stop and think as well. Erika and I are combiners, so we helped to make sure the group stayed focused on our objective and also kept the conversation going and open for everyone to contribute. Jimmy and I were also a mix between steady and influencer, so we kept the game moving through any minor disagreements. There was a time in the game that some of us could have easily escaped, but we discussed the best moves to make that would save everyone. I think we worked really well together this round, and it helped that we had different communication styles at work. Without even realizing it, our group definitely followed Fisher's Model. Stage 1 was us getting to know each other, which was seen in our first meeting. Stage 2, conflict, could be seen in round 2 of our game. Since we were more comfortable with each other, we felt more open to disagree with suggestions that someone made. We were all very respectful of everyone and their ideas. Stage 3, coming to an agreement, was also seen in our game 2. There were plenty of times when we were playing that we all came to a common agreement on what to do next. Stage 4, reinforcement, was seen at the end of our game 2 play, when we all realized what had gone better during that meeting in comparison to the first meeting. The fact that we followed Fisher's Model without even realizing it shows that we were using our communication styles effectively, which ended up making our second game go much more smooth and successful.
\ No newline at end of file
The second game turned out much better than the first game that we played. When we met to play the first round of the game, everyone was a little bit shy and didn't really want to speak up. Although it seemed fine for everyone, this caused us to just agree on the first solution anyone thought of because we were too uncomfortable to speak up. This was the feedback that needed addressed, so we wanted to be more open with each other and comfortable enough to speak our ideas during the next game. Our meeting for game 2 went much better. We were a little more comfortable with each other and actually bounced ideas off of each other, rejecting some and accepting others. We actually discussed tactics and what we all planned to do for each turn. While we were playing, our different communication styles really showed. Logan and Adam are definitely logical thinkers. When we would discuss what to do next, and they would think logically when trying to make decisions, which really made the rest of us stop and think as well. Erika and I are combiners, so we helped to make sure the group stayed focused on our objective and also kept the conversation going and open for everyone to contribute. Jimmy and I were also a mix between steady and influencer, so we kept the game moving through any minor disagreements. Overall, I think all of us also used the active communication style, too. There was a time in the game that some of us could have easily escaped, but we discussed the best moves to make that would save everyone. Instead of some of us just running out and escaping, we made a plan of attack so that the rest of us wouldn't end up getting killed by a zombie when they spawned. I think we worked really well together this round, and it helped that we had different communication styles at work. Without even realizing it, our group definitely followed Fisher's Model. Stage 1 was us getting to know each other, which was seen in our first meeting. Stage 2, conflict, could be seen in round 2 of our game. Since we were more comfortable with each other, we felt more open to disagree with suggestions that someone made. We were all very respectful of everyone and their ideas. Stage 3, coming to an agreement, was also seen in our game 2. There were plenty of times when we were playing that we all came to a common agreement on what to do next. Stage 4, reinforcement, was seen at the end of our game 2 play, when we all realized what had gone better during that meeting in comparison to the first meeting. The fact that we followed Fisher's Model without even realizing it shows that we were using our communication styles effectively, which ended up making our second game go much more smooth and successful.
