Group Discussion - A Test of Your Soft Skills PDF

# Chapter Five: Group Discussion ## A Test of Your Soft Skills ### Learning Objectives * Personality traits and soft skills that group discussions test for * Right ways to demonstrate key traits during a group discussion - communication, teaming, flexibility, reasoning, influencing, leadership a...

# Chapter Five: Group Discussion ## A Test of Your Soft Skills ### Learning Objectives * Personality traits and soft skills that group discussions test for * Right ways to demonstrate key traits during a group discussion - communication, teaming, flexibility, reasoning, influencing, leadership and assertiveness * Key steps to succeed in group discussions * Group discussion types * Typical topics for group discussion * Guidelines for the people initiating and closing the group discussion * Dos and don’ts in a group discussion ### Why Do Employers Conduct Group Discussions? Group discussions are a powerful way of assessing one’s personality and soft skills. The assessment of a candidate by his potential employer is based on his resume, test scores, and in some cases, telephonic pre-screening. These are all necessary, but not sufficient. Before hiring a candidate, employers want to put them in situations that they will typically encounter in the workplace. Group discussions are an important way to achieve such a real-time assessment of a candidate. ### What Aspects Of One’s Personality And Soft Skills Are Revealed In Group Discussions? A group discussion is used to help reveal multiple aspects of one's personality and soft skills. Some of these are as follows: * Ability to work as a team * Communication skills, including active listening * Leadership and assertiveness * Innovation, creativity, and lateral thinking * Flexibility * Reasoning * Ability to influence ### Case Studies The following three case studies indicate the importance of group discussions in ascertaining the proficiency in soft skills. #### Case 1 **“The economic crisis has shown the superiority of socialism over capitalism”** A group of 13 candidates was appearing for a group discussion as part of the selection process for a prestigious management institute. This topic was given to them by the moderator, and they were given one minute to begin. * **Trisha:** I agree completely that capitalism is an evil economic system that has caused the grave crisis today. * **Dirk:** Absolutely! Just see the number of jobs lost around the world. I read a UN report that predicted that up to 51 million jobs worldwide could disappear just in one year due to the economic slowdown. It has hit all countries around the world, with the US unemployment rate at 8.1%, the UK unemployment rate at 6.3%... * **Rohan:** (laughs to interrupt Dirk) I know you are Mr. Statistician, Dirk. Did you memorize all these numbers? * **Anita:** I agree we are digressing, but let us respect Dirk’s views and also understand what Dirk may be driving at with the statistics. * **Dirk:** I deeply appreciate your intervention Anita. What I was driving is, what good is a system if it can’t protect the jobs of people around the world? * **Anita:** Let’s now get back to track. The topic we have is whether the economic crisis has exposed the ills of capitalism and established socialism as a superior economic system. First, it is important that all of us have an aligned view on capitalism and socialism. In a capitalist system, there is private ownership, free market, independent media, and democracy. Production and distribution is owned by individuals. This is believed to lead to more efficiency, better products and services, and higher prosperity. In a socialist system, ownership and control of production and distribution is by the community as a whole. It is planned centrally. I would welcome your ideas on this. * **Vijay:** Thanks Anita for bringing the discussion back on course. I agree with the characteristics you have stated. I would now get even more specific to the topic at hand by looking at the causes of the current economic crisis. The root of the crisis was subprime mortgages. During the housing boom, many mortgage companies and banks in the US gave loans to home buyers who normally should not have been given credit. Many of these subprime mortgages were sold as AAA bonds, thus making people around the world think that these have low risks. But when the housing market cooled, delinquencies began to rise as subprime borrowers became bankrupt. The value of bonds that were based on subprime mortgages declined steeply thus forcing banks and investment houses to write-off huge debts. This led to a worldwide credit crisis. * **Rohit:** I believe a socialist system would not have caused this economic crisis. * **Anita:** Well, that’s hard to infer. We have seen the collapse of the erstwhile Soviet Union too. Right? That shows the failure of a central planning system, and the ills of socialism due to inefficient institutions and lack of speed. * **Sam:** Not quite true Anita. The failure of the Soviet bloc is not a good example, because it was not true socialism. If you want an example of true socialism successfully at work, look at the European social model of welfare provision. * **Vinod:** My position is that one crisis does not make the capitalist system flawed. Look at all the success of the capitalist system over the years—the benefits of entrepreneurism, the innovation it has brought, the wealth that has been created. * **Vijay:** The points stated by all of you are correct and serve as point examples. If you look around the world, you will see that all successful economies use various models. The current economic crisis does not show the superiority of one system over the other. What it shows is the risk of complete deregulation. The germination of the subprime mortgage crisis was evident, in hindsight, in 2006, when more than 100,000 homes were already in foreclosure, and many more likely. Due to complete lack of regulation and greed taking over, the financial services industries were allowed to run amok. No new legislation was introduced that could have put the checks and balances to avoid the crisis. I read that Mr N.R. Narayana Murthy said in a recent interview about the economic crisis, that capitalism is not dead. What we have seen is the result of greed; it is not about the fundamental tenets of capitalism. It is about the inability of the government to be a good, decent regulator. We need to ensure fairness, transparency and accountability. * **Anita:** Excellent summary Vijay, and thanks to all for a lively discussion. To close, I believe the right system must blend the growth objectives of the capitalist system, with some degree of control of the socialist approach. The socially conscious economic models of some of the Scandinavian countries, and parts of Asia and Latin America, should give us the confidence in the benefits of adopting the best of both capitalist and socialist approaches. #### Case 2 **“Solar energy is the right solution to meet India’s growing energy needs.”** As soon as the group discussion session opened with the above topic with nine members, Anir, who had some basic knowledge of solar photovoltaics, took on the role of the initiator. * **Anir:** I have no doubt in my mind that solar energy is the most appropriate energy source for India. Let me explain why, based on some data. The Government of India has set a goal of procuring 5% renewable energy for its power grids by 2015 and saving 10,000 MW by 2012 through energy-saving methods. Solar cell manufacturing is on the priority list of the panel set up by the Prime Minister of India to frame a National Policy for the manufacturing sector. The National Manufacturing Competitive Council (NMCC) has suggested that the solar mission be given a higher level of empowerment, along the lines of India’s space missions or nuclear power initiatives. * **Subir:** This is a one-sided view, and your data can be misleading. It is important to take a balanced perspective so as to not get carried away by only the benefits of solar energy. Simply put, economics will not favor solar energy, because the cost of fossil fuels is significantly lower than that of solar energy today. Currently, the prices of high-efficiency solar cells can be more than $1000, and some households may require more than one. * **Brian:** Add to that the fact that solar cells can generate electricity during the daylight hours only. For about half the day, solar panels are not producing energy for our homes. * **Keith:** Subir makes a powerful statement of economic unviability of solar energy. Let me build on it. Solar-powered electricity costs two to three times to produce compared to that from traditional sources. Inefficient energy conversion and the need to produce a very large number of wafers contribute to the high cost. Only 16% of sunlight that hits a solar cell can be collected as usable electricity. To produce sufficient number of solar cells to generate 500 MW a year, a solar cell fab must produce as many as 400,000 wafers a day, an exponentially large number than even the largest semiconductor plants produce. Thus the cost of silicon alone, not to mention the manufacturing costs, for that number of wafers can become prohibitive. * **Mahesh:** Can I make a point here? Sorry please excuse my poor English. * **Keith:** Sure, please go ahead Mahesh. Don’t worry about your communication; we are here to help you. * **Mahesh:** I think when we look at the cost of solar, we must combine the cost at the beginning, and also the cost savings every year. * **Keith:** Mahesh has a good point here. I stand corrected. It is the total cost that is important: the initial installation cost (which may be high for solar panels) plus the recurring cost over the next 10 years (which is extremely small for solar energy). So you can get the payback from the investment in a few years. Thanks Mahesh for making a good point. Do others have additional points in favor of solar energy being the answer or not of India’s growing energy needs? * **Sonal:** In addition to the cost advantage, we must also consider the fact that solar energy is environment-friendly. It does not contribute to pollution as there are no emissions from generating solar power. Also, one can harness electricity in remote locations that are not linked to the grid. * **Keith:** It is clear that solar energy has its pros and cons. But I would look at it very differently-from the point of need. Sonal touched upon it, but the fact is that with India’s geographical diversity and complexity, rural electrification just isn’t possible through conventional energy systems. While I agree with the high installation cost disadvantage of solar panels today, this must be viewed as a challenge to bring down the costs by leveraging high technology solutions. Let me conclude by saying that solar energy can be used to power 80,000 un-electrified villages in India and make a real difference to the lives of hundreds of millions of people in India. We cannot and should not let this opportunity pass. #### Case 3 **“Creating more IITs would dilute the unique brand it is reputed for.”** * **Sonal:** Friends, the topic we have been given today is that creating more IITs would dilute the unique brand these institutes are reputed for. Let me open with some thoughts on the IIT system first and I would look forward then to listening to your perspectives. IITs have a rich legacy of quality built consistently over a period of over 50 years. A big part of the highest quality and excellence is driven by the stringent admission rate each year. Only about 1% of the students who take the IIT entrance actually qualify. The other reason behind the excellence of the IIT is the quality of its eminent faculty. The Government has a noble objective of increasing the number of high calibre engineering graduates by creating more IITs. There is an increasing number of students applying for the IITs each year; so there is a need to increase the intake even if it is to keep the same success ratio of 1%. But there is a growing worry that this will be at the cost of diluting the exclusive brand the IITs are reputed for. The other concern is that the quality of faculty and infrastructure will not be able to scale as these new IITs come up. Let us get some of your thoughts on this. * **Kaustav:** The quality of faculty is a big issue. We already have a problem that many of our brightest minds are not joining as faculty. We will add to the problem by creating more IITs. * **Simran:** I don’t quite agree Kaustav. What’s the use of having an elite group of few thousand IITians sitting in a penthouse? They can hardly make an impact. Hence increasing the number of IITs is indeed the need of the hour. Besides, as far as the quality of faculty is concerned, there needs to be a focused programme to address this jointly by the industry and the academia. * **Kaustav:** This focused programme for faculty improvement is all nonsense. Mark my words Simran; your ideas will go nowhere. More IITs will be disastrous. I can’t believe you are defending this position. * **Som:** I request all of us to not cross the line of professionalism in this discussion. Of course we can differ in our opinion, but let us not get personal. With that, let’s not dwell further on it, and move on! I have a very different perspective on this topic for this group’s consideration. Why don’t we look at the new IITs as an opportunity to create some new models of academia-industry collaboration? For example, each of these new institutes can be equipped with satellite or high-speed broadband connections to the industries and other institutes. We should also have video conferencing capabilities. Using these, experts around the world can deliver high-quality lectures to the students over video. Similarly, we should not stop merely at creating good labs, but create great centres of excellence in these IITs in emerging areas such as energy and health care. To keep pace with the times, we should actively leverage social networking and the open source developer community for innovations and active collaborations. In short, we should challenge ourselves to extend the IIT brand even further by bringing in value-added discontinuities that will actually take us to the future. That would be a good to great transformation of the IITs. * **Sonal:** Well said Som! I like your out-of-the-box thinking. Instead of playing defense, let’s play offense. * **Som:** Yes, and let us build new IITs for the new generation. What do others think? I welcome some critical comments. It will help us tune the idea further based on your feedback. * **John:** Som, let me build on your excellent approach. You proposed video conference. Why not take it further by having high definition video conference? We can extend it further by having systems with more intuitive and interactive human interfaces, such as touch-screen and gesture-driven. We should also leverage the convergence of the three screens—the PC, the TV and the wireless phone-and provide students an unparalleled classroom experience. You talked about the open source developer community. I agree, but will add a caution that technical support is sometimes hard to get for these open platforms. We must find a way to address this. * **Brian:** One problem with the approach Som has suggested is it may be unrealistic. It is also likely to be cost-prohibitive. We should simply say no to new IITs and preserve the exclusivity the brand enjoys today. * **Som:** I appreciate your concerns Brian; you are asking some very important questions. I have done an analysis. The whole set-up I talked about will cost ₹1.5 crores. It is indeed expensive as you have pointed out. What must, therefore, be done is to get sponsorship from the builders of these electronic equipment. In return, they get to showcase their products to the vast student and faculty population across institutes and industries. My calculations show that if we can do this effectively, it will actually be a net positive earning for the IITs! * **Sonal:** Friends, the topic we have been given today is that creating more IITs would dilute the unique brand these institutes are reputed for. Let me open with some thoughts on the IIT system first and I would look forward then to listening to your perspectives. ### Learnings From The Three Case Studies #### Case 1 * Trisha started abruptly (possibly to impress the moderator) by giving her opinion right away without substantiating it. She came across as shallow. A poor start can cause irreversible damage. It must be understood that a group discussion is not a debate. It is a discussion where ideas should be deliberated upon and analysed. * Rohan's interruptions of Dirk were in bad taste. It gives a glimpse of his weak interpersonal skills. Anita, on the contrary, possesses a strong sense of personal values and respect for others. She supported Dirk, and also later asked for opinion from others. Further, she has depth, analytical capability, and high confidence. Her communication has clarity. She also crisply concluded, not by stating her personal position, but summarizing the position of others in a very objective manner. * Vijay entered the discussion late, but it was clear that he had been a good listener. He brought in fresh perspectives to the discussion and helped break the deadlock. By relying on some data and quotes, he made his points credible. He should, however, be crisper and brief in his comments. Instead of stating all the points in a one-time long-winded articulation, it would have been better to communicate in smaller chunks. * The others made some comments, but failed to carry it through and did not make an impression. #### Case 2 * Anir started by taking a position too soon. He was anxious to show his knowledge to all, but could not carry it past the opening when the discussion became more intense. * Keith came out as a person who has depth and clarity of thought. He demonstrated credibility in his articulation. He gave credit to his peers for their views and built on it. He also showed support to one of his peers who was low in confidence. He also came across as an objective person. When he said ‘I stand corrected,’ it was clear that he was flexible in accepting views that are contrary to his own. He also showed a very innovative thinking approach and ability to appeal to the hearts of his peers in his closure. Instead of only going by facts and data (which he did effectively earlier), he talked about the potential to make a difference to the lives of hundreds of millions of people. * Some of the others who participated made some comments but failed to create any impression. #### Case 3 * Sonal made an excellent start by introducing the topic in a balanced manner and asking the group for its views. She also did a good job in closing the discussion. She could have done better by contributing more when the discussion got deeper. * Som did an excellent job by firmly, but politely, asking all to keep a professional approach in their discussion. The position of a person can be contested, not the person. He also appreciated the views of others and showed his strong interpersonal skills. He brought in a fresh perspective by looking at the new IITs as an opportunity, instead of debating the pros and cons. He was quick in his thinking, and used data and analysis to back up his position. * John was good in building on other’s ideas, and taking it further by adding more specifics, pointing out areas of concerns that must be looked at. * The others who spoke did not make much of an impression. As can be seen from the above case studies, group discussion captures the personality through multiple lenses. Let us delve into some of these soft skills and personality traits. ### Ability To Work As A Team Being a team player is one of the most important personality traits that candidates are expected to exhibit in a group discussion. Yet many participants in a group discussion get it completely wrong. They try to overly project themselves at the expense of their peers. They attempt to win by making others lose. They feel that the moderator must see them, not their peers, as the key contributor. When others falter, they look the other way rather than coming to their support. A group discussion looks for skills that are exactly the opposite of these. Employers look for teaming skills in situations that mimic the workplace. In the real world, many employees stand out by exhibiting exemplary teaming skills, while others get stuck due to the lack of this trait. During the group discussion, a person must demonstrate the skills to build up a team consensus around his position. He must also build on the strengths and positions of others to develop a proposal that he can rally the team around. One of the more difficult soft skills one must possess is the ability to turnaround people with opposing views. Similarly, it exposes one’s flexible approach to embracing divergent views from others. The ability to do this shows that whatever may be the work situation, one will be able to work with others in a team and take decisions jointly. It is also possible that during a group discussion, some participants appear reticent or deviate from the topic or even become emotionally cloyed. Some participants may also come across as being low in self-confidence for some reason. In such cases, a good team player may proactively bring the person in the middle and strive to get the best out of the person to get the best out of his team, with the possibility of the prin effectively toward the interperson in a team effectively. Thus, the first essential trait of a candidate when he is participating in a group discussion is that he must possess this critical quality of teaming with others, and must demonstrate this personality and soft skill unambiguously. ### Communication Skills, Including Active Listening A group discussion clearly brings out the ability of a person to crisply articulate his views and listen to those of others. An effective communicator focuses on the following during the group discussion: * **Active listening** that shows keen interest in others’ views * **Body language** that exudes self-confidence; no unnecessary or distracting gestures * **Crisp** (not long-winded or deviating from the subject) articulation * **Tone modulation** to emphasize a position while seeking others’ special attention * **Not interrupting others** when they are speaking * **Being patient with and supporting those** who are low in confidence * **Choice of words** that demonstrate professionalism, avoid words that hurt or disrespect * **Keeping an even eye contact** with all participants * **Use of simple words and phrases** * **Bring back discussion** when it gets off-track * **Asking ‘relevant’ questions** (not ones that are just intended to participate) * **Using credible data and information** to drive any contentious point In addition to the above, there are a few fundamental requirements of good verbal communication. Depth of vocabulary, proper grammar, correct accents and intonation patterns of the English language, and fluency of speech are some of these requirements. These are stated here: * **Vocabulary** A good vocabulary is of great help to a speaker in expressing their thoughts and ideas to the listener without faltering and hunting for the proper word in the midst of the group discussion. * **Grammar** A sound knowledge of the basic principles of grammar is of great help. Speaking in incorrect English may bring down the quality of the speaker’s communication and create a negative distraction in the minds of others. * **Accent** Speaking with correct accent and intonation definitely creates a positive impression in favour of the speaker. * **Fluency** Fluency of speech without the embarrassing humming and hawing gives the speaker a chance to win in the first round and achieve his/her objective. This also allows him to put forward arguments in an assertive and convincing way. * **Clarity** Everyone listening to the speaker should get a clear idea of what is being articulated. It is also important not to be verbose, and to be concise. This not only retains the group’s attention but also saves time. One should also be audible to everyone and must be sure to speak with the proper tone and modulation, in gentle yet persuasive manner. To communicate well in a group discussion, one must also be conversant with recent developments and key events of the past. Such an understanding helps a person navigate effectively through the discussion as various pros and cons of the topic are deliberated on. Supporting data and analysis, where these can be cited with credible references, also adds immense value to the discussion. However, these should be used judiciously at appropriate times, and should not come across as a boring data dump to impress others. * **Active listening** A few words on active listening: this is the skill where most candidates fail to focus on. “Give every man thy ear but few thy voice” was the advice of old Polonius to his son Laertes in Shakespeare’s *Hamlet*. Active listening simply means giving full attention to what is being said. Normally when a speaker is stating a point seriously, very few of the others pay proper attention to what is being said. They may be absorbed in thinking of something else or mentally rehearsing what they would say when their turn comes. But the expectation during any group discussion is that every participant should have a pen and note book (or at least a scrap pad) in which the key themes (but not all details) raised by the speaker are carefully noted. This is possible only with active listening. An active listener should have enough patience to listen to the viewpoints of other participants, agree if he is in sync, or politely refute those arguments where he is not. He should try his best to coordinate the views of the different speakers and synchronize the arguments that give him an edge in the discussion. Being a good listener and asking questions can also be a powerful way of leading a discussion out of a deadlock. ### Non-Verbal Communication Non-verbal communication refers to the messages that a person sends out, consciously or unconsciously, which are received and automatically evaluated by the receivers. In fact, a non-verbal message often conveys more meaning than the spoken words—the verbal communication. The importance of non-verbal communication lies in the fact that it becomes operative from the moment a candidate enters the room where a group discussion is being held. Relevant research in the field of non-verbal communication gives an interesting estimate of the percentage of understanding that is gained from the spoken word. While it is 38% from the tone of voice and 55% from non-verbal expressions, it is only 7% from the spoken word! During a group discussion, therefore, a person must focus on the non-verbal message he conveys through the depth of his voice, facial expression, gestures and postures. The tone of the speaker may be indicative of a host of information about the speaker. Anger, hesitation, feeling of nervousness, happiness—all these can be detected by the other participants and the assessor from the person’s voice. Similarly, one must be careful with gestures and postures during a group discussion. The way the speaker stands (upright or bent), the way he sits (straight or slumped), where and how he keeps his hands sends out many a signal about the speaker (Fig. 5.3). It was Charles Darwin who made the first spectacular scientific study on non-verbal communication in his book *Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals* (1872). Here he stated that it is natural for mammals to indicate their feelings and emotions on their faces. Facial expressions, in most cases, correctly indicate the feelings of anger, hatred, fear, happiness, sorrow, etc. Most important of these non-verbal communications is the study of the eyes called *opulesics*. Eyes act like a mirror. They are capable of revealing quite a number of things about a person—emotions, feelings, annoyance, disgust, joy, sorrow, etc. Along with the eyes, the human voice has an important role in communication. It reveals a host of information about the speaker, especially his emotional state, while speaking. The role of effective communication, both verbal and non-verbal, is therefore extremely vital in a group discussion. ### Leadership and Assertiveness A group discussion brings out one or a few leaders in a very natural manner. These leaders are not usually appointed prior to a group discussion; they emerge from it. These are people who visibly come across as confident and in-control, who show initiative and are adept at guiding the theme, who keep to the right course and ensure the intended outcome of the discussion. Leaders show empathy toward others in the way they listen to others and resolve conflicts. When discussions get into a deadlock due to polarized opinion, leaders find a common ground to come out of such situations. They steer the discussion toward a path that the team collectively agrees with. They support others where needed, and are not biased in their assessment. Leaders are assertive. They make powerful comments themselves, and drive the group toward recommendations or decisions. When discussions deviate from the given topic, leaders play a vital role in bringing the discussion back on course. If needed, they are not shy of using words that are firm. However, they are always very mindful of being professional and do not come across as being pushy or over-aggressive. Leaders are strong communicators, who come across as credible and refreshingly honest in their views (Fig. 5.4). A weak person who lacks confidence may come across as being inflexible. But leaders are willing to change their opinion or admit their mistakes if they see a differing perspective from another participant that is more compelling. By doing so, they gain instant respect of the rest of the group. They also ensure they do not take dissent personally and steer the group away from getting personal with verbal abuses. During the course of the discussion, leaders come across as completely engaged and objective. They also demonstrate clarity of thinking. The depth of their arguments makes them credible and hard to counter. Almost unknowingly during the course of the group discussion, they become a rallying point for others who others look up to. To summarize, for one to emerge as a leader from a group discussion, they must possess the following attributes: * **Understanding of the topic** * **A firm, balanced, and mature personality** * **Ability to convince others through logic and reasoning** * **Ability to communicate their points forcefully and effectively** (a leader does not need to speak too long, but must be crisp and articulate) * **Seek participation from all team members** (and encourage the introverts to speak up as well) * **Listen to, keep an eye contact with, and respect views of all participants, including ones with differing opinion** * **Resolve conflicts** when the discussion gets into a deadlock (including keeping one’s cool if someone makes undignified or bitter comments, and assert with reason) * **Make the discussion progress** - not get into an eternal long-winded and unfocused articulation of independent views by every member * **Ability to politely, but firmly, cut discussions** that are irrelevant or repetitive, and bring them back on track * **Articulate the team’s views as a crisp summary** with the buy-in of all participants ### Reasoning This is one of the more difficult aspects of a group discussion. It demonstrates the ability to comprehend the essence of the given topic and put forward a compelling argument. Many participants fail to read the intent of the topic and what it is trying to test. Several others lose their course midstream while they are communicating. Few even contradict themselves due to the lack of clarity in their own mind. One common failure during a group discussion is to look at it as a debate. A group discussion is not a debate; it is a discussion! The objective is to analyse a topic from multiple perspectives and arrive at a recommendation or a shared position. Many participants instead look at it as a debate, and position themselves as either being in favour of or against the given topic. People with strong reasoning skills do not instantaneously jump into a single thread of argument. They mentally map the theme from multiple lenses, and look at it from different perspectives. They avoid the trap of missing differing perspectives. Simplicity is their virtue. By keeping their line of thinking uncluttered, they are able to deftly go through their line of reasoning in a step-by-step manner. This helps them to put forward arguments in a concise manner that is understandable to others. ### Ability To Influence Since there is usually no appointed leader in a group discussion, influencing skills play a key role. In many real-life situations, one does not have direct authority over others, yet has to get things done through his influence. During a group discussion, the ability to steer others toward one’s point of view is a valuable skill. Typically, each of the views articulated during a group discussion stand in isolation. Very few participants build their ideas on top of another. They have their own line of thought. Hence, the ideas from the group come across as disjoint and unrelated to one another. This provides an opportunity to those with sharp influencing skills to take charge. These individuals set the context of the discussion either at the opening or in the early stage. They leverage their soft skills of intuition, observing, and active listening to others, even subtly supporting some key opinion leaders in the group to come up with an approach to influence others to their point of view. Their objective is to get as many people veer around their point of view, and minimize dissent A point of caution here is that influencing needs to be done carefully and subtly. It should come across as natural. It should not be perceived by the rest of the group as being political to score some points or impress a decision maker. Blatant attempts to do so (or even perceived to do so) may be counter-productive. ### Innovation, Creativity And Lateral Thinking Organizations thrive on creative people. Hence it is no surprise that group discussions try to identify people with an innovative bent of mind. These are people whose minds flourish constantly with new ideas, different perspectives and out-of-the-box and lateral thinking. When a group discussion continues in its natural linear course, people with creative thinking can change the thread by bringing in a fresh line of thinking. Their lateral thinking ability brings to the open problems or opportunities that others may miss. Their views are often greeted with a mixed response-with some being highly appreciative and others being completely dismissive (or even annoyed). Creative people often need the support of some open-minded leaders to take their innovative ideas to conclusion, and ensure that it gets the air-time to be discussed, and not dismissed prematurely. Lateral thinking often helps in resolving deadlocks. When the views of a group get sharply polarized, a person who offers an out-of-the-box perspective may help the group reach a common ground. In addition to coming up with innovative ideas, creative people also find unique ways to deliver their points of view. Some of them use the art of storytelling and real-life examples and anecdotes to make a compelling argument. ### Flexibility Flexibility is an important personality trait that is critical in group discussions. Having a firm point of view that is inflexible creates an impression of being stubborn. Organizations require people who are flexible in their approach, who are willing to change their opinion where there are compelling reasons to do so. Hence group discussions attempt to identify people who can take a flexible stand. The expectation is to evolve a consensus in the group. This requires listening to, and deliberating on, multiple different points of view with an open mind. It may require one to sometimes stand by the original stated position, or tune or modify it, or sometimes even drop it completely. It is important to recognize that being flexible is not looked upon by others as a sign of weakness. It is regarded as a sign of self-confidence and maturity. ### Key Steps To Succeed In A Group Discussion Some key steps to succeed in a group discussion are as follows: * **Preparation** This includes the following. * Be well-versed about recent news and events around the world. * Attend workshops on communication skills if needed. * Practice public speaking to gain confidence. * Involve in group activities. * Seek feedback from those who you trust on your performance in group events. * Practice the art through as many mock sessions as possible. * **During the session** Take care of the following. * Be well-groomed and have a professional attire. * Be confident and calm. * Know the names of other participants and indication of their general personalities. * Come across as being balanced, polite and mature. * Be aware of the personality attributes that the moderator is looking for (as stated earlier in this chapter). ### Group Discussion Types Group discussion can be either topic-based or case-based. * **Topic-based group discussions** in turn can be one of the following types: * **Factual topic** These are often current topics on political, social or economic issues. These test the candidates' ability to reason, influence the team and lead. Examples: Why economic divides should be the focus of concern today, rather than political divide; How to have a sustainable 9% growth in India's GDP, etc. * **Controversial topic** These topics deliberately bring in arguments and are usually very intense. These test the candidates’ ability to resolve conflicts, to keep an objective and mature position, interpersonal skills, etc. Examples: India’s participation in WTO is an advantage or detriment to the nation; Multinational corporations support or impede a country’s domestic fabric, etc. * **Abstract topic** These are the most difficult and test one’s ability to think when confronted with unexpected situations (that are common in any organization). Examples: Noise and chaos, Pink, etc. * **Case-based group discussion** is a simulation exercise where a group is given a case and is expected to analyse it from multiple directions. The focus here is on sound reasoning, and not whether a position is correct or incorrect. Often the case asks a question on what one should do when confronted with a certain situation. Examples here are often typical of an organization’s real-life situations. * Example: A case of how an HR manager should deal with a directive from his management to reduce the workforce of a company when he disagrees with the decision; or a case of how to deal with a strong performer in a company who delivers results, but has very poor interpersonal skills. ### Topics For Group Discussion Topics for group discussion may be of diverse nature. Here are some examples: * Is cloning of humans ethical? * Impact of globalization on India? * Is cricket hampering the growth of other sports in India? * Election of an African-American president in the US augurs well for India? * The nuclear treaty will regenerate India? * Brain-drain is good for the country? * Industrialization and agriculture cannot coexist? * There should be reservation for the low income population of India irrespective of caste? * Can green energy ensure a safe pollution-free environment? ### The Responsibility Of The First Speaker The first speaker on the topic plays a very important role. He initiates