Stages of Group Development
A. The Five-Stage Model
Notes:
1. Forming:
• Characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose, structure, and leadership.
• Members are trying to determine what types of behavior are acceptable.
• Stage is complete when members have begun to think of themselves as part of a group.
2. Storming:
• One of intragroup conflict. Members accept the existence of the group, but there is resistance to constraints on individuality.
• Conflict over who will control the group.
• When complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership within the group.
3. Norming:
• One in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates cohesiveness.
• There is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie.
• Stage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group has assimilated a common set of expectations of what defines correct member behavior.
4. Performing:
• The structure at this point is fully functional and accepted.
• Group energy has moved from getting to know and understand each other to performing.
• For permanent work groups, performing is the last stage in their development.
5. Adjourning:
• For temporary committees, teams, task forces, and similar groups that have a limited task to perform, there is an adjourning stage.
• In this stage, the group prepares for its disbandment. Attention is directed toward wrapping up activities.
• Responses of group members vary in this stage. Some are upbeat, basking in the group’s accomplishments. Others may be depressed over the loss of camaraderie and friendships.
6. Many assume that a group becomes more effective as it progresses through the first four stages. While generally true, what makes a group effective is more complex. Under some conditions, high levels of conflict are conducive to high group performance.
7. Groups do not always proceed clearly from one stage to the next. Sometimes several stages go on simultaneously, as when groups are storming and performing. Groups even occasionally regress to previous stages.
8. Another problem is that it ignores organizational context. For instance, a study of a cockpit crew in an airliner found that, within ten minutes, three strangers assigned to fly together for the first time had become a high-performing group.
9. The strong organizational context provides the rules, task definitions, information, and resources needed for the group to perform.
A. The Five-Stage Model
Notes:
1. Forming:
• Characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose, structure, and leadership.
• Members are trying to determine what types of behavior are acceptable.
• Stage is complete when members have begun to think of themselves as part of a group.
2. Storming:
• One of intragroup conflict. Members accept the existence of the group, but there is resistance to constraints on individuality.
• Conflict over who will control the group.
• When complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership within the group.
3. Norming:
• One in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates cohesiveness.
• There is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie.
• Stage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group has assimilated a common set of expectations of what defines correct member behavior.
4. Performing:
• The structure at this point is fully functional and accepted.
• Group energy has moved from getting to know and understand each other to performing.
• For permanent work groups, performing is the last stage in their development.
5. Adjourning:
• For temporary committees, teams, task forces, and similar groups that have a limited task to perform, there is an adjourning stage.
• In this stage, the group prepares for its disbandment. Attention is directed toward wrapping up activities.
• Responses of group members vary in this stage. Some are upbeat, basking in the group’s accomplishments. Others may be depressed over the loss of camaraderie and friendships.
6. Many assume that a group becomes more effective as it progresses through the first four stages. While generally true, what makes a group effective is more complex. Under some conditions, high levels of conflict are conducive to high group performance.
7. Groups do not always proceed clearly from one stage to the next. Sometimes several stages go on simultaneously, as when groups are storming and performing. Groups even occasionally regress to previous stages.
8. Another problem is that it ignores organizational context. For instance, a study of a cockpit crew in an airliner found that, within ten minutes, three strangers assigned to fly together for the first time had become a high-performing group.
9. The strong organizational context provides the rules, task definitions, information, and resources needed for the group to perform.
0 comments:
Post a Comment