|
Other: |
| The
group development model shown below combines aspects of theories put
forth by Jones (1973), Tuckman (1965), and Banet (1976). Jones describes
a four-phase model, each phase of which is analyzed in terms of group
members' concerns with personal relations (process) functions and
task functions. |
|
Phase |
Task
Functions |
Personal
Relations Functions |
|
1 |
Orientation |
Testing
and Dependence |
|
2 |
Organizing
to Get Work Done |
Intragroup
Conflict |
|
3 |
Information-flow |
Group
Cohesion |
|
4 |
Problem-solving |
Interdependence |
Explanation
of the Phases
Phase I Task:
Orientation
In the first phase, the needs of group members are to be oriented
to the task, that is, to define the task, specify issues, identify expectations,
and explore the nature of the work. From this members develop a common
understanding of the group's purpose that begins to answer the questions:
Why are we here? What are we supposed to do? How are we going to get it
done? And, what are our goals?
Personal
Relations: Testing and Dependency
In the first phase, participants generally act as if they depend on
the leader to provide all the structure. They look to the leader to set
the ground rules, establish the agenda, to do all the "leading," while
the group members acclimate themselves to the setting. Feelings involved
are excitement, apprehension, and confusion. Group members exhibit behavior
to test what behavior is acceptable and what is taboo, and begin to establish
boundaries, to consider themselves as individuals vis-a-vis the group,
and to define the function of the group and the leader.
Concluding Phase I
This phase generally concludes when there is general agreement that
the goals are achievable and that change is possible--whether it be changing
behavior, making a decision, or solving a problem.Phase
IITask:
Organizing to Get Work Done
Organizing to get work done involves a number of group decisions.
These include:
- Establishing
work rules
- Determining
limits
- Defining
the reward system
- Setting
the criteria for the task
- Dividing
the work
- Assigning
individual responsibility for particular tasks
Personal
Relations: Intragroup Conflict
Participants bring to a group activity unique perspectives and many
unresolved conflicts with regard to authority, dependency, rules, and
agenda. The result is that groups experience interpersonal conflict as
they organize to get work done. The conflict may remain hidden, but it
is there.
The variety of organizational concerns that emerges reflects the interpersonal
conflict over leadership and leadership structure, power, and authority.
Awareness of the possibility of change that was begun in Phase I, becomes
a denial of the possibility of and the need for change; group members
adhere instead to one or another extreme. The feeling level is marked
by dependency on old ways and resistance to take the risks that work and
change require.
This polarizing effect of early group interaction is documented in the
work of Myers and Lamm (1975). After some initial effort to alter previously
held positions, group members revert to their previous, pre-group stance
and fight to maintain it. This phenomenon, variously described as regression
or resistance, seems to occur when the group is perceived as an arena
wherein deep-seated values, beliefs, and world views can be challenged.
During this phase, the atmosphere is tense and much work is accomplished.
Concluding Phase II
This phase concludes when group members have struggled enough with
each other to resolve, partially, their personal relations concerns (similarities
to and differences from other group members, authority, dependency, and
leadership) and have agreed upon how they will organize to do the work.
This allows issues to emerge that are sufficiently important for the group
as a whole to consider.Phase
IIITask:
Information Flow
Participants begin sharing ideas and feelings, giving and soliciting
feedback, exploring actions, and sharing information related to the task.
This is a period during which people become gradually more comfortable
about being part of a group. There is an emerging openness with regard
to the task.
Personal Relations: Group Cohesion
It is during the third stage of development (assuming the group gets
this far) that the participants, having resolved interpersonal conflict,
begin to experience catharsis and a feeling of belonging to a group. This
enables the group to focus on the task. Different points of view enrich
the group process.
This phase is marked by the emergence of a "both/and" attitude on the
part of group members, which replaces the "either/or" thinking of Phase
II. Power and authority are seen as residing both in the group and in
its members. In many theories this is the central period of group development.
During this stage there is sometimes a brief abandonment of the task in
which a period of play, an enjoyment of the cohesion being experienced,
takes place.
Concluding Phase III
When it becomes apparent that there has been learning in the form
of new insights and new solutions to problems, the group moves into phase
four.Phase
IVTask:
Problem Solving
During Phase IV, the group's tasks are well-defined, there is a commitment
to common activity, and there is support for experimentation in solving
problems.
Personal Relations: Interdependence
Stage four, which is not achieved by many groups, is characterized
by interdependence in personal relations. Interdependence means that members
have the ability to work singly, in any subgroup, or as a total unit.
The group's activities are both collaborative and functionally competitive.
The feelings are focused on enjoyment of the here and the now. A reflective,
meditative silence coexists with playful and pleasurable interaction with
others. The task seems completed and there is a need for closure, repose,
and quiet.
This movement is marked by integration and celebration. Much work is accomplished;
previously difficult issues are simply and easily resolved. There may
be attempts by some members of the group to "freeze" change and the group
may decide to stop its work here.
Concluding Phase IV
If it develops the awareness that this apparent and point offers the
possibility for a new beginning, the group may begin at this new starting
point and work through each of the four phases in a somewhat different
fashion.
References
Banet,
Anthony G., Jr. "Therapeutic intervention and the perception of process."
In Pfeiffer, J. William Pfeiffer and Jones, John E. (eds.), The 1974
Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators. University Associates: La
Jolla, CA 1974.
Banet, Anthony G., Jr. "Yin/Yang: A perspective on theories of group development."
In Pfeiffer, J. William Pfeiffer and Jones, John E. (eds.), The 1976
Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators, University Associates: La
Jolla, CA, 1976.
Bion, W. R. Experiences in Groups. Basic Books: New York, 1959.
Butkovich, P., Carlisle, J., Duncan, R., & Moss, M. "Social system
and psychoanalytic approaches to group dynamics: Complementary or contradictory?"
International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 1975, p. 25.
Jones, John. E. "A model of group development." In Pfeiffer, J. William,
and Jones, John E. (eds.), The 1973 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators.
University Associates: La Jolla, CA, 1973.
Lundgren, C.C. "Trainer style and patterns of group development." Journal
of Applied Behavioral Science, 1971, p. 7.
Myers, D.G., and Lamm, H. "The polarizing effect of group discussion."
American Scientist, 1975, p. 63.
Tachman, B. W. "Developmental sequence in small groups." Psychological
Bulletin, 1965, p. 63.
|