SlideServe
Télécharger Obtenir Pro
Menu
Accueil Pro
Préférences
ApparenceLight Aide et commentaires
© SlideServe · v2026

Exploring Group Development Theories and Models for Effective Management

floresn avatar
floresn
54 diapositives · 1.2K Views · Jan 02, 2020

This lecture evaluates pop literature on group development, theories, change over time, coherence of phases, and explanations for changes. Various scholars' theories are analyzed, including Bales, Strodtbeck, Braden, Brandenberg, Schutz, Fisher, and Tuckman.

#exploring group development theories and models for effective management #exploring group development theories and models for effective management ppt #powerpoint #presentation
Exploring Group Development Theories and Models for Effective Management - slide 1
01 / 54Exploring Group Development Theories and Models for Effective Management
1 / 17

Télécharger la présentation

Exploring Group Development Theories and Models for Effective Management
Une image / un lien ci-dessous est fourni (tel quel) pour télécharger la présentation

Politique de téléchargement : le contenu du site vous est fourni TEL QUEL pour votre information et votre usage personnel ; il ne peut être vendu, concédé sous licence ni partagé sur d’autres sites sans l’accord de son auteur.Le contenu vous est fourni TEL QUEL, pour votre information et votre usage personnel uniquement. Téléchargez la présentation en cliquant sur ce lien. Lors du téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à télécharger une présentation, l’éditeur a peut-être supprimé le fichier de son serveur.Pendant le téléchargement, si vous ne parvenez pas à obtenir une présentation, le fichier a peut-être été supprimé par l’éditeur.

F I N

Plus de contenu associé

Transcription de la présentation

  1. Group Development Dave Seibold Professor, Department of Communication, L&S Co-Director, Graduate Program in Management Practice, Technology Management Program, CoE COMM 106: Lecture 7

  2. Goals for Lecture Evaluate ‘pop literature’ on grp development Learn about theories -- and theory building -- in the area Analyze own groups in terms of these theoretical perspectives

  3. Fundamental Issues Do groups “change” over time?

  4. Fundamental Issues Do groups “change” over time? If so, do all groups change in same ways? (Unitary sequences)

  5. Fundamental Issues Do groups “change” over time? If so, do all groups change in same ways? (Unitary sequences) Or do different groups change in different ways? (Multiple sequences)

  6. Fundamental Issues Do groups “change” over time? If so, do all groups change in same ways? (Unitary sequences) Or do different groups change in different ways? (Multiple sequences) Are the changes coherent enough to be phases, or merely activity clusters?

  7. Fundamental Issues Do groups “change” over time? If so, do all groups change in same ways? (Unitary sequences) Or do different groups change in different ways? (Multiple sequences) Are the changes coherent enough to be phases, or merely activity clusters? How can these changes be explained?

  8. “Phase” of Group Development A qualitatively different subperiod of interaction within an overall period of time in which a group proceeds from initiation to completion of a problem

  9. Elements of Group“Theories” Scope Conditions: type of group and task(s) specified Description: relationships among variables Explanation: generative/causal mechanism(s) Predictions: testable/falsifiable Rooted in interaction Account for permanence and change

  10. Elements of Group“Theories” Capture imagination/innovative Parsimonious/elegant Hueristic value

  11. Overview of Theories/Models Group Development Task Self-Analytic Bales & Strodtbeck Bennis & Shepard Braden & Brandenberg Schutz Fisher Tuckman

  12. Bales Equilibrium Theory Interdependence affects group cooperation/competition Task goals promote interdependence

  13. Bales Equilibrium Theory Interdependence affects cooperation/competition Task goals promote interdependence Groups’ main function = task achievement Focus on instrumental activity threatens group stability

  14. Bales Equilibrium Theory Interdependence Task goals Main function = task achievement Instrumental activity threatens stability Expressive activity to counteract tensions and build solidarity to accomplish task

  15. Bales Equilibrium Theory Interdependence Task goals Main function = task achievement Instrumental activity threatens stability Expressive activity counteracts task tensions Groups have tendency toward equilibrium

  16. Bales Equilibrium Theory Interdependence Task goals Main function = task achievement Instrumental activity threatens stability Expressive activity counteracts task tensions Tendency toward equilibrium Principle of homeostasis

  17. Bales’ Coding Scheme: Interaction Process Analysis (IPA) Gives Information Asks for Information Gives Opinions Asks for Opinions Gives Suggestions Asks for Suggestions Agrees Disagrees Releases Tension Creates Tension Shows Solidarity Shows Antagonism

  18. Bales and Strodtbeck’sThree Phases of Group Development Stage 1: Orientation Stage 2: Evaluation Stage 3: Control

  19. Bales and Strodtbeck’sThree Phases of Group Development Stage 1 Orientation Group members may individually comprehend the group's task orientation, but the focus of this phase is reaching collective consensus regarding the group's task.

  20. Bales and Strodbeck’sThree Phases of Group Development Stage 2 Evaluation Group members must reach consensus on what their attitudes will be regarding the task and what value judgments (evaluations) they will use to solve their problem.

  21. Bales and Strodbeck’sThree Phases of Group Development Stage 3 Control Group members focus on deciding what to do about the problem they face. Near end of allotted time, members realize decisions concerning solutions must be made. They feel pressured to take control of the process by completing the task.

  22. Braden and Brandenberg’sThree Phases of Group Development Phase 1: Members self-centered w/own socio-emotional needs. Atmosphere tense; frustration and conflict evident; decision making difficult. Phase 2: Phase 3:

  23. Braden and Brandenberg’sThree Phases of Group Development Phase 1: Members self-centered. Phase 2: Members realize self-centeredness is dysfunctional. React by becoming overly group-centered. Phase 3:

  24. Braden and Brandenberg’sThree Phases of Group Development Phase 1: Members excessively self-centered. Phase 2: Members overly group-centered. Phase 3: Members balance self-centered needs and group-centered needs. Goals internalized, task work proceeding/accomplished.

  25. Fisher’s Coding Scheme Dimension 1: A - Asserted B – Seeking Dimension 2: 1 – Interpretation 2 – Substantiation 3 – Clarification 4 – Modification 5 – Summary 6 – Agreement

  26. Fisher’s Coding Scheme Dimension 3: f – favorable toward proposal • u – unfavorable toward proposal • a – ambiguous toward proposal Other Codes:On – origin of a decision proposal • Dn – reintroduction of a decision proposal • Example: • A2fO3 = a favorable assertion substantiating the third decision proposal introduced

  27. Fisher’s Model of Decision Emergence • Orientation Phase • Conflict Phase • Emergent Phase • Reinforcement Phase

  28. Orientation Phase A. Verbal acts reflect getting acquainted, clarifying, tentatively expressing attitudes B. Few assertions; opinions expressed ambiguously; ambiguous statements reinforced C. Agreement used to facilitate interaction, not to reinforce ideas (flight from task) D. Excessive primary tension

  29. Conflict Phase • Verbal acts indicative of dissent, polarized attitudes B. Conflict over decision proposals; direction of group now more important C. Direction of group now important (no flight from task) D. Tentativeness, ambiguity end

  30. Emergent Phase A. Fewer unfavorable acts B. Favorable comments followed by favorable comments; Unfavorable comments followed by ambiguous ones (opinions being modified) C. Dissent reduced D. Interpretative acts repeated

  31. Reinforcement Phase • Significantly more acts of favorable interpretation and favorable substantiation B. Few ambiguous and unfavorable acts (consensus emerges) C. Dissent has almost vanished D. Unity affirmed; members commit to decision

  32. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases II. Interdependence Phases

  33. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases A. Dependence-Flight

  34. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases A. Dependence-Flight B. Counterdependence-Fight

  35. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases A. Dependence-Flight B. Counterdependence-Fight C. Resolution-Catharsis

  36. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases A. Dependence-Flight B. Counterdependence-Fight C. Resolution-Catharsis II. Interdependence Phases A. Enchantment-Flight

  37. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases A. Dependence-Flight B. Counterdependence-Fight C. Resolution-Catharsis II. Interdependence Phases A. Enchantment-Flight B. Disenchantment-Fight

  38. Bennis & Shepard'sTheory of Group Development I. Dependence Phases A. Dependence-Flight B. Counterdependence-Fight C. Resolution-Catharsis II. Interdependence Phases A. Enchantment-Flight B. Disenchantment-Fight C. Consensual Validation

  39. Schutz’s Theory of Group Development I. Theoretical Constructs (F.I.R.O.) II. Postulates of Group Development - 2

  40. Schutz’s Theory of Group Development I. Theoretical Constructs (F.I.R.O.) A. Inclusion (I) B. Control (C) C. Affection (A)

  41. Schutz’s Theory of Group Development II. Postulates of Group Development A. Principle of Group Integration: I, C, A, (may repeat) . . .

  42. Schutz’s Theory of Group Development II. Postulates of Group Development A. Principle of Group Integration: I, C, A, (may repeat) . . . . . B. Principle of Group Resolution: . . . . . . . . . . A, C, I

  43. Task Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases • Orientation • Emotional Response to Task Demands • Open Exchange of Relevant Interpretations • Emergence of Solutions

  44. Task Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Orientation: Members implicitly or explicitly orient themselves to answering questions such as "What is our task?" "What is expected of us?" "How will we proceed?" "What information is needed?"

  45. Task Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Emotional Response to Task Demands: Members must reconcile their own orientations to the task with the group's emerging orientation.

  46. Task Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Open Exchange of Relevant Interpretations: Members focus their task activity on sharing opinions, suggestions, solutions concerning whatever the group is working on.

  47. Task Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Emergence of Solutions: Members adopt an alternative that seems acceptable for solving their problem, and they complete their task work.

  48. Social Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Forming: Testing dependence Storming: Intragroup conflict Norming: Development of group cohesion Performing: Functional role-relatedness

  49. Social Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Testing-Dependence: Group members appear to be “dependent” on the leader. They also “test” each other to see what types attitudes and behaviors will and will not be permitted in the group. (Forming)

  50. Social Development of Group Tuckman’s Four Phases Intragroup Conflict: Members display their individuality and resist group structure. Conflicts between members center around a key issue: To what degree will individual members become interpersonally involved in and committed to the group and its work? (Storming)