Collaborative Group Work

The task of writing and the assumption that it is either a solitary and/or a colloborative effort are explored in part two of the book Writing Together, entitled "On Collaboration".   Though, the latter is examined thoroughly as questions of how often and in what capacity does coauthorship take place?

According to Lunsford and Ede's initial results, participants in their study viewed the process of writing as a solo and/or collaborative act.  Some individuals perceived writing as strictly a solitary venture, despite exerting energy "...on the mental and procedural activities which precede and co-occur with the act of writing, as well as on the construction of the text" (71).

The researchers continue to establish the modes of collaborative work by distinguishing among members who plan, draft and then compile as a group.  Another option includes a single person drafts, it is then given to another person who then looks it over.  The final option features an individual who directs writing tasks, as each member figures out their own duties, and then one person compiles the information together.      

The discussion at hand looks to confirm if collaborative work is not only productive but a useful tool in assessing one's writing.  Further discussion includes but is not limited to creating a complete document for the group's intended users.  The benefits of group work is weighed out against the disadvantages of non-collaborative work.   As noted by some of the professionals interviewed, most individuals prefer to work in a colloborative environment.  This is due to the conscious effort that the writer puts in towards not only their audience, but also the one's they work with in a group setting.  As the first drafts are set in place, ideas are expressed openly in a constructive environment.  Group members look to everyone's input, and thus all ideas are tapped into, and only the best are expressed in the document.  More perspectives are essential in order for all important issues to be addressed within a piece of work.  Along with this, in order for group work to be productive, motivation is a key factor for optimal participation.  If an group member's ideas are acknowledged and appreciated, then one receives value for their own work and input.  In addition, there are checks and balances that allow individuals to overcome their inabilities when writing.  When there are more heads involved, this will naturally reduce the amount of errors within the document.  It can also lead to a more clearer document when involving different scopes of people.

The disadvantages are outnumbered by the advantages of group work.  Varying styles and writing abilities are issues of concern when working in a group.  People must manage these styles and ensure that they are producing a fluid, coherent document.  Along with this issue, a sense of ownership is lost when sharing credit for a document.

I am writing in this blog alone, but my thoughts and ideas have been influenced by the reading I have done for this class.  As I submit this blog, it might be commented on and critiqued for further evaluation of my arguments.  This will then improve my blog, along with my writing skills because of the feedback I receive in return.   Thus providing another argument for collaborative group.

Question:

Are there any other limitations or disadvantages to working in a collaborative group other than the ones expressed by Lunsford and Ede?