Transcript Organizational Behavior - University of Richmond

Coming together is a
beginning, staying together
is progress, working
together is success.
Henry Ford
Group Development
Outline





Group Development and Group Cohesion
Tuckman’s Basic Group Development Model
An Alternative Explanation for Developing Group
Cohesion
 Social Identity Theory
Model of Group Socialization
 Factors Affecting Impact of Membership Change
Dyadic Group Development
 Social penetration theory
 Relational dialectics
Group Cohesion

The strength of the bonds linking the group members to the
group, the unity of the group, the feeling of attraction for
specific group members and the group itself, and the degree
to which the group members coordinate their efforts to
achieve goals. (Forsyth, 1999)
• “A dynamic process reflected in the tendency for a group to
stick together and remain united in the pursuit of its goals and
objectives” (Carron, 1982)
Cohesion & Performance
Performance
Success
Cohesion
Relationship Between
Cohesiveness and Productivity
Group Development

Group development
 How groups develop
over time as members
interact, learn about
each other, structure
relationships and roles

Sequential stage theories
 Group development
proceeds through a fixed
series of stages
Theories of Cohesion


Research generally suggests that there are five
stages to the development of group cohesion.
Tuckman (1965), defined these as
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Orientation (Forming)
Conflict (Storming)
Structure (Norming)
Work (Performing)
Dissolution (Adjourning)
Tuckman’s Five-Stage Theory
of Group Development
Performing
Adjourning
Norming
Storming
Forming
Independence
Dependence/
interdependence
Return to
Independence
Tuckman’s Five-Stage Theory
of Group Development
Forming
Individual
Issues
Group
Issues
Storming
Norming
Performing
“How do I fit
in?”
“What’s my
role here?”
“How can I
“What do the
best
others expect
perform my
me to do?”
role?”
“Why are we
here?”
“Why are we
fighting over
who’s in
charge and
who
does what?”
“Can we agree
“Can we do
on roles and
the
work as a
job properly?”
team?”
Group Cohesion: An Alternative
Explanation

Group cohesion may be caused by the processes
of social identity and self categorization (Hogg)
Social Identities

People have an innate and strong tendency to mentally
organize things and people into categories; ingroups and
outgroups

To the extent that we associate ourselves with groups (i.e. selfcategorization), we have social identities
 To the extent that we identify with groups that are valued
(e.g., powerful, prestigious, high status, popular), we’ll feel
good about ourselves.

Social identities (via our group memberships) are important
aspects of how we define ourselves
 Accentuation of ingroup similarities and outgroup
differences leads to depersonalization of members as
individuals take on the identity of the group
Social Identity & Group Cohesion



Group cohesion can be explained by social
attraction whereby members are attracted to
the group entity (ideas and beliefs) rather than
its individual members.
Popular members of a group are those who
epitomize the groups beliefs and norms
This idea of shared beliefs and values
generates a higher degree of unity and sense of
“we-ness”
Model of Group Socialization

Group Socialization
 Process of mutual adjustment between the group and its
members

Model of Group Socialization
 Investigation phase

Socialization phase

Maintenance phase

Resocialization phase

Remembrance phase
Factors Affecting Impact of Membership
Change

Fixed/stable vs. not fixed/unstable

Reason for member change

Frequency/predictability of member change

Size of change relative to group size

Centrality of departing members
Dyadic Group Development

Models of two-person group development

Dyadic group development theories


Social penetration theory
Relational dialectics
Social Penetration Theory

Social penetration theory
 Relationships develop as
people engage in
reciprocal self-disclosure
The Self as a Multilayered Onion

Levels of self
 1. Public self
 2. Semi-private self – limited set of people know
 3. Inner Core



a. Private domain
b. Values, self-concept, deeply felt emotions
Relational intimacy is tied to how much other person
knows of these levels
Self Disclosure

Definition: The disclosure of personal
information not available to all.

Self-disclosure has breadth (range) and
depth (how revealing) and develops over time

Everyone has different level of comfort


some disclose info. freely and often
some hold personal info. very close

What is acceptable / unacceptable?

Expectation of reciprocity
Social penetration theory (Altman & Taylor, 1973)
Breadth and Depth of a Typical Onion
Social Penetration Theory

4 Stages:

Orientation stage


Exploratory affective stage


More information is exchanged but it’s still not very
personal
Affective stage


Exchange of superficial (public) information about self
Close friendships develop and some intimate details are
shared; some barriers remain
Stable exchange stage

Highly intimate; able to predict each other’s actions and
responses
Another View on Dyadic Relationships

Relational dialectics
 Dyadic relationships change in response to opposing, yet
related, forces

Dyadic partners experience internal, conflicting pulls causing
relationships to be in a constant state of flux, known as
dialectical tension. The pressures of these tensions occur in a
wavelike or cyclical fashion over time. Relational Dialectics
introduces the concept that the closer individuals become to
one another, the more conflict will arise to pull them apart.
Relational Dialectics

3 relationship dialectics
 Openness/closedness dialectic


Novelty/predictability dialectic


‘I want to be close/I need my own space’
‘I like the familiar rhythms/we need to do something new
and different’
Autonomy/connection dialectic

‘I like sharing with you/I don’t want to share this with you’
Group Development Activity



Trace the development of a group you once belonged to
(consider, for example, a class you took last semester).
Make note of the extent to which the group experienced
 (a) an orientation stage,
 (b) conflict,
 (c) increased cohesion and changes in structure,
 (d) a period of high performance.
Which of the two theories discussed in the book--Tuckman's
stage model or Bale's equilibrium model--best describes your
group?