The leadership of adult groups has often been a nerve-wracking job involving planning for people, arbitrating between people, steering people, thinking for people and checking on people. No wonder it has been difficult to get persons to accept leadership responsibility. A more comfortable and more effective concept of leadership is rapidly emerging, however. It will be our purpose in this lesson to learn something of the elements of “group dynamics”, on which this new concept is based, and their various applications.
STAGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GROUP
It is possible to think of a group as a living organism, with needs it seeks to satisfy and other characteristics of the kind possessed by individual human beings. Groups seem to express their frustrations in much the same way that individuals do — by aggressiveness, withdrawal, disintegration, rebellion, and so forth. Groups seem to go through much the same kind of development as do individual human beings. During its beginning stage, for example, a group exhibits many of the characteristics of an infant child. It is dependent upon the guiding hand of a parent (the leader). It seeks his approval. It has difficulty in coordinating the efforts of its members. Its goals are likely to be poorly defined, so that it moves first in one direction and then in another. The first few meetings of a new group are likely to be taken up largely with the individual members testing themselves out on the group and trying to find acceptable status in it. There is likely to be considerable difficulty in communication. Terms will have to be defined quite often, and there will be frequent verbal misunderstanding.
The list of infantile behavior characteristics of the group could be extended. They appear, regardless of the relative maturity of the individuals in the group.
A later stage of development, like that of an adolescent individual, is characterized by the struggle between the desire for independence and the fear of leaving the protection of a guiding hand. A group has learned to do certain things so well that it feels capable of acting independently. Yet it is not sure that its judgment is sound. A group in this stage will frequently disagree with its leader and may express open hostility toward him. It may even request a change of leaders. But if it is threatened with being left without a leader it will quickly retreat.
When a group reaches “maturity” it functions as a well-integrated, independent organism. It accepts responsibility for its own actions. It faces its problems and solves them objectively. It divides its tasks among its members in keeping with their abilities. It organizes its procedures according to the requirements of each situation. The members of a mature group have shifted the center of their attention from their personal concerns (such as their status in the group) to the group’s concerns (such as making a decision that will be in the interest of all). There is evidence of group maturity when individual members make their contributions in the spirit that once they are given to the group they are no longer personal property that must be defended against attack or change.
The wise leader will understand this process of natural growth and will do whatever is necessary to assist the group toward maturity. The leader who does not understand the process or who refuses to “give up his authority” or “lose his control of the group” can easily keep a group in an infantile state, completely dependent upon him. On the other hand, a leader to whom permissiveness is a rigid principle can seriously retard the development of a group by failing to give it the kind of assistance it needs.
CONCEPTS OF LEADERSHIP
There are at least three approaches to the leadership of groups. They have some things in common, but each has its own emphasis. It is seldom that any one of them is used to the exclusion of the others. Almost any leader can detect some of each in his own practice, and his practice may vary with circumstances. Each approach is appropriate in others. This discussion is to enable one to identify the characteristics of each, and to select the one most appropriate for a given situation.
SOCRATIC, LEADER-CENTERED AND GROUP-CENTERED LEADERSHIP
A newer approach to group leadership has grown out of experimental research conducted by the late Kurt Lewin at the Child Welfare Research Station of the University of Iowa and his co-workers in the Research Center for Group Dynamics now located at the University of Michigan. Their conclusions have been extended and supported by studies in such diverse fields as counseling and psychotherapy, social psychology, industrial relations and education. The central lesson in all these studies is that leadership — and, indeed, all aspects of group functioning — is a problem for the group to solve, and is not the peculiar responsibility of any individual. To distinguish this approach from others we have chosen to label it the group-centered approach.
In one of his early studies of group behaviour Kurt Lewin and his associates investigated the effects of three different kinds of leadership on various groups. Democratic leadership, in which the leader helped the group to organize itself and make its own decisions, proved consistently to produce the best results in terms of things accomplished, co-operative relationships and personal growth. The groups under authoritarian leadership, in which the leader maintained rigid control, produced less and encountered a great deal more friction and frustration. The groups that scored the lowest on all counts were those under laissez-faire leadership, in which the leader maintained completely passive.
Spurred on by the successes of these early experiments, a great deal of energy has been devoted in recent years to research in group behavior. “Group dynamics,” according to two of the pioneer leaders in the field, “endeavors to study the why of what happens in groups. It is an area of research in the process by which groups work – discuss, reach decisions, plan action, and carry it into effect …. It is the application of research findings in producing greater group productivity, in developing the growth of groups, and in improving individuals in their sensitivity to what is happening in the group and in their ability to assume more efficiently group leadership and membership responsibility.
By pooling, the findings from research in group dynamics with the discoveries in other areas of social science, especially psychotherapy, education, and industrial relations, it is possible to set up some assumptions about group behavior and to suggest some tentative guiding principles of group-centered leadership.
SOME ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING GROUP-CENTERED LEADERSHIP
1. Although a group has many of the characteristics of a single organism from its earliest stages, it is composed of individuals who think of themselves as separate entities and who come into the group seeking the satisfaction of personal needs and desires. The problem in terms of the group’s welfare, is to help the individual satisfy his needs through serving the group’s needs, rather than by exploiting the group for selfish purposes. There is a wide choice of ways to satisfy the needs for recognition, ranging from bragging and monopolizing the discussion (individual-centered behavior) to contributing useful leadership services to the group (group-centered behavior).
2. Each individual has a fundamental urge to grow — to achieve greater maturity and self direction. Growth is encouraged in an atmosphere of freedom and mutual acceptance of responsibilities. It is assumed, therefore, that individual growth will take place best in a group that is free from authoritarian control and maturely accepts responsibility for its own direction.
3. Each individual exists in the center of his own private world of experience and reacts to reality as he sees it. Any attempt, therefore, to impose another person’s (such as a leader’s) view of reality on him is doomed to failure, even though he may seem outwardly to acquiesce and understand. A new experience, fact, or attitude is meaningful to a person only in terms of his own highly personal realm of experience.
4. Each person has his own concept of himself and tends to reject or deny anything that is inconsistent with this concept. An individual feels threatened whenever judgments are made about him (or implied in actions) that contradict his concept of himself. His reaction to this threat is to become defensive and hostile. A person cannot, therefore, be forced or even persuaded into changing a self-concept that is not in accordance with reality; but in an atmosphere that is free from threat, free from judgment about persons, an individual can begin to look at himself objectively and of his own volition, revise his self-concept. The meaning of this assumption for group leadership is obvious. A climate of warm understanding, acceptance, and permissiveness is essential to good group functioning and good learning.
5. A _ person who understands and accepts himself, and feels that others understand and accept him, will necessarily show more understanding and acceptance of others. There is mounting clinical evidence that a real change takes place in one’s attitude toward other people after he has had the experience of being fully accepted by others. This fact is probably the psychological heart of the Judeo-Christian religion. An attitude of love toward people engenders the same attitude in them.
6. Every group is a social system. Whenever people meet together they tend to systemize their relationships. Friendship patterns form, circles and cliques come into being. Status levels tend to be created with distinct symbols (such as manner of dress or speech, or signs of deference) setting off one status from another. Group efficiency is seriously impaired when its social system becomes stratified. Group members are likely to divert their energy from the group problem to competition for status; co-operative relationships may degenerate into intergroup rivalries; and the basis of efficient communication among group members may be destroyed through deliberate misinterpretation by hostile factions. The best social organization for group life is a one-level democratic social system.
7. Groups, like individuals, resist change. Present ways of doing things are almost always more comfortable than new ways–until the new ways are tried and found to be better. Resistance to change, if it is accepted as a normal reaction, can be turned to constructive use in helping a group grow into maturity. The points at which resistance occurs generally indicate the points at which change is most needed. A group can be helped to analyze the causes of its resistance objectively in a climate of acceptance and freedom, and to work out its own solutions. Resistance to change then becomes an instrument of progress.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF GROUP-CENTERED LEADERSHIP
Growing out of the assumptions that underlie group-centered leadership are certain principles of operation. While these principles have been tested under a wide variety of conditions, they must still be taken tentatively until further research proves them more fully.
1. Leadership is a function of the group, not of any individual. The group is conceived as an independent, self-directing organism. A number of functions must be performed in its service if it is to operate efficiently, of which the leadership functions are one type. It is more accurate to refer to “leadership functions” than to refer to “a leader”. For the leadership functions may at times be performed by several or all of the group members, as well as by a designated “leader”.
This statement does not imply that there is never an individual who occupies the position of a leader. In the early stages of group life there is a real need for one person who will take the initiative in helping the group to define its goals, organize itself, and establish operational procedures. There will always be a need, furthermore, for an individual to act as convener. But the sooner the leadership functions are dispersed among different members of the group the more maturely and efficiently will it operate.
One device that speeds up this dispersal of leadership functions is the leadership team. If the group chairman is named before it meets (as in the case of many committees) it would be possible to name the other members of the leadership team at the same time. This practice has the advantage of starting the group off under the concept of the dispersal of leadership functions, but it has the disadvantage of denying the group a share in the selection of its initial leadership representatives. If the group selects its own chairman, it can select the other members of the leadership team at the same time.
In introducing group-centered leadership into a group, it may be desirable to limit the leadership team to functions that are already understood and accepted, such as those of the chairman, the recorder (or secretary), and the resource person. A less familiar function, which might well be introduced early in the process, is that of group observer, whose responsibilities will be described later. As the group gains experience in analyzing its needs and setting up services to fill them, it will find a number of additional functions its members can perform.
2. Leadership is responsible for establishing the climate of the group. The climate of the group is determined largely by the person who helps organize it. His actions can produce an atmosphere of competition and hostility, formality and reserve criticism and threat, or permissiveness and freedom. If he regards himself as an authority or as possessing some kind of superiority, his actions are likely to be of a directing type, and the group climate will be authoritarian. The group members will certainly feel somewhat restricted in what they can or cannot do, at least until they get the approval of the leader.
On the other hand, if the leader’s attitude toward himself is that of a fellow learner who has certain specialized functions in the situation, and if his attitude toward the other members of the group is one of deep respect for their personal integrity and worth, the result will be a free and democratic climate. The leader’s expression of respect will communicate to each individual an attitude of acceptance of him as a person with unique experience. When the individual feels that he is being understood and is being treated with respect, he will be relieved of the necessity of aggressively proving his independence and can turn without threatening his status to the problems facing the group. These attitudes of the leader produce a climate in which the group can develop a mature “group personality” characterized by a democratic unity and the mutual sharing of responsibility. Each member of the group becomes less self-conscious and more group-conscious.
3. Leadership helps the group to define its purposes and objectives. One method found useful in determining group objectives is to conduct a problem-census in which the members of the group state the problems they are concerned about that might be considered by the group. These can be listed, priorities can be assigned to them, and general objectives can be drawn from them. The leader is free to express his own needs as the needs of a member of the group, not as the desires of a superior.
The taking of a problem-census and the defining of objectives early in a group’s life has several good effects. This is usually the only way in which the group will feel that it is dealing with important problems. It starts the group off on the basis of the interest of its members. It gives the group experience from the beginning, in making successful decisions. It helps to build a “we-feeling” among group members.
The original census may not bring out all the problems of concern to the group, nor even the most important ones. It is generally helpful, therefore, for the group to restate its problems and objectives periodically.
4. Leadership helps the group to organize itself. When the group defines its objectives, it really is taking the first step in organizing itself, since a group’s objectives greatly influence its form of organization. For example, a group that exists primarily for the purpose of receiving instruction is likely to put more emphasis on the role of resource leadership than would a group that exists for the purpose of social fellowship.
Usually the general form of organization — for instance, committee, club, special interest group, fellowship group, or organized class — is determined by the situation causing the group to be organized. There are occasions, however, in which a group has a choice of the form of organization it wants.
Other organizational decisions may have to be made about such things as frequency, time and place of meeting, basis of financing, whether or not there is to be a written constitution, whether or not the group wants to have a name, and what the relationship of the group is to other groups, an agency, or the community.
Probably the most crucial decisions about organization are those having to do with the functions necessary to efficient group operation. These seem to be some of the functions that are being performed when a group is functioning well:
A. Organizing the thinking of the group, the group member:
1. States, restates, or clarifies subject of discussion. Gives initial statement of problem; restates problem in same or similar manner, to original statement; attempts to clarify the meaning of previous statements of problem.
2. Summarizes progress. Attempts to summarize progress group has made in its discussion up to that point or to define positions group has attained relative to the goal or goals of the discussion.
3. Brings discussion back to the main topic. Attempts to keep the group headed in the right direction, to bring it back from excursions into side issues or problems not pertinent to the original discussion topic.
4. Raises problems of direction or goals. This includes such comments as: “I don’t see where this is going to lead us;” “It seems as though we are going in circles;” “What are we trying to do here anyway?” etc.
5. Asks for clarification concerning the progress of the discussion, or the position attained relative to the goal or goals of discussion.
6. Integrates ideas or suggestions; pulls them together.
7. Shows or clarifies relationships between or among ideas.
B. Elaborating the discussion, the group member
1. Gives opinion.
2. Gives information.
3. Cites examples, story. Gives an appropriate illustration, story, or example of the point under consideration by the group.
4. Cites authority.
5. Suggests new possibilities.
(a) Course of action;
(b) Procedures for group, or method of organizing group for the task;
(c) New way of handling difficulty.
6. Raises problem or question for group to act upon.
C. Requesting clarification or further elaboration, the group member
1. Asks opinion.
2. Asks information.
3. Asks suggestions.
4. Requests restatement, redefinition, or further development of an idea presented in a previous participation.
D. Evaluating discussion content, the group member
1. Attempts-evaluation or constructive criticism of one or more previous participations. Participant may either agree or disagree with what has gone before, but criticism must be directed at ideas and not at personalities.
2. Suggests that further discussion of an idea is needed or that previous discussion has been inadequate.
E. Acting as group critic, the group member
1. Evaluates or comments upon group functioning.
2. Prods group or expresses need for group to:
(a) Take action;
(b) Come to a decision;
(c) Move along at a faster pace.
F. Increasing group solidarity, the group member:
1. Encourage. Compliments another member on his thinking, his contributions to discussion, etc.; indicates understanding or acceptance; attempts to draw out another member by praise or encouragement; exclaims with satisfaction, pleasure, or enthusiasm; engages in friendly joking or laughter; praises group as a whole; encourages group to renew its efforts.
2. Mediates, harmonizes, relieves tension.
(a) Third person attempting to bring agreement between two clashing points of view; shows factors common to both sides; attempts to isolate points on which there is a real difference of opinion and if possible to show how these differences may be reconciled; attempts to demonstrate that point on which parties differ is of little consequence.
(b) Pours oil over troubled waters; attempts to cool off heated tempers;
(c) Suggests that discussion of a point concerning which there is strong disagreement be dropped or postponed;
(d) Jokes to relieve tension.
3. Facilitates flow of communication.
(a) Helps another member to express his thoughts;
(b) Expresses feelings of group;
(c) Regulates flow of communication;
(d) Attempts to keep communication channels open.
G. Serving as group memory, the group member Records the main points of discussion, agreements reached, decisions made, action to be taken. Reviews past actions for the group whenever necessary.
H. Acting as a good group member, the group member
1. Disciplines himself to facilitate group progress.
2. Admits he has been proven wrong or that he was in error.
3. Shifts his position on a question in order to go along with the group or in order to maintain group harmony.
4. Volunteers or agrees to assume group functions. The distribution of these functions among the members of a group is a major and continuous problem of organization. In the early stages of group development there is a natural tendency for the functions to be clustered together into the roles of the chairman, the secretary, and the observer. If these roles become too rigid the group is prevented from sharing responsibilities and from maturing. It is important, therefore, that all the members become aware of the essential functions as soon as possible and practice performing them. One device that speeds this process is that of rotating roles among the members of the group. The chairmanship can be assumed by two or three members in the course of a meeting, as can other roles. In this way each member becomes familiar with all the functions. When the group really matures it will hot be necessary to define specific functions — a member of the group will be sensitive to the need for a specific function at a given time and will automatically perform it. At that point, leadership functions become identical with membership functions.
5. Leadership helps the group determine its procedures. Efficiency of operation requires that there be agreed-upon rules of operation. The standard method of solving this problem, that of parliamentary procedures, is seldom satisfactory in group-centered groups. It tends to introduce an element of stiffness that destroys the climate of warm informality. It disrupts group unity. In general, no decision is completely satisfactory unless it has been reached by consensus. If, for some reason, it becomes necessary to take a vote, it should be done with the greatest respect for the position of the minority. It is probably best to avoid trying to lay down very many general rules of procedures. Each situation has its own requirements. In one, a decision may be reached most efficiently through general discussion and consensus. In another, it may be preferable to have the group divide into small work-groups. In a third situation the testing of conflicting ideas in a role-playing scene might be the most rewarding procedure. As the group becomes familiar with the various methods of solving problems it can determine which procedure will work best in each situation.
6. Responsibility for making decisions is kept wholly in the group. The taking of responsibility is one function no individual leader can perform for a fully selfdirecting and mature group. As a member, anyone who is performing a leadership function is free to make suggestions, state opinions, and generally participate, but the group must decide for itself what its course of action will be.
7. The group examines its internal problems and its process objectively in order to increase its efficiency. By developing the habit of looking not only at what it is doing but how it is doing it, a group can develop improved ways of operating. In this process the role of group observer, which will be discussed in detail later, can be particularly helpful. Many of the ticklish problems of member behavior that plague the leaders of leader-centered groups, such as how to keep the discussion on the beam, what to do with the person who monopolizes the discussion, and how to handle stubbornness, hostility, and shyness, tend to disappear when a group becomes objective about its process. For example, in a leader-centered group, the leader is blamed if he lets one member dominate a discussion, and yet he can hardly do anything about it without impairing his relation with that member. In a group-centered group the problem would be brought to the group by some member (or the observer) remarking that there does not seem to be general participation in the discussion — what does the group want to do about it? The problem then becomes one of group process, not of personalities, and the group can solve it objectively. It is not uncommon in group-centered groups for the person who has been talking too much to come up with the best solution for getting more people to talk.
8. The group is sensitive to the feelings as well as the ideas of the group members, and responds to both with equal understanding and acceptance. If a group member expresses impatience with the way things are going, this feeling should be accepted, and the individual and group should decide what they want to do about it. The effect of this recognition of feelings is to release them for constructive use. The group member whose negative feelings are accepted as valid does not have to be defensive about them.
9. The group uses the resources within its own members, or brings in outside resources, as its needs require. Facts, experience, skills, and reasoned judgments are often necessary before further progress can be made by a group. A good group first analyzes the latent resources within its own members and makes use of them whenever they meet the need. It does not hesitate, however, to go outside the group and recruit specialists who can give it what it needs. Care must be exercised, in this case, to prepare the resource person for the role he is to play in the group. In general, a resource person should be used in much the same way an encyclopedia is used — to be turned to when needed. Unhappy situations develop when the resource person does not realize the limitations of his function and tries to take over the direction of the group.
10. The group develops the habit of testing its own thinking. In many situations the group can actually try out decisions in role-playing or in direct practice. In others, it can intellectually explore the consequences of its decisions if carried into action. The habit of testing ideas leads to group members saying to one another, “Let’s test that idea out,” rather than, “You’re crazy.” The steps in group thinking, as in individual thinking, should be: (1) identification of the problem; (2) assessment of the factors and forces underlying the problem; (3) assembling of necessary facts about the problem; (4) developing ideas about the solution of the problem; (5) testing these ideas; (6) taking action; and (7) evaluating results.
THE GROUP PROCESS OBSERVER
The function of observing how a group is functioning and of feeding back to it information that will help it improve its process can be performed by any member of the group. Until the members have gained some experience with the function, however, it is advisable to establish the role of observer and have it performed by designated individuals. The role of the observer has been defined at the National Training Laboratory in Group Development as follows:
The observer is a group member who has been assigned the specific job of observing the group’s functioning as a totality and of helping the group evaluate its way of working in order to help it increase its efficiency. In practice, this has meant that the group observer (who may be a rotating or a fixed member) does not participate in the group’s discussion of its various subject matter topics. Instead he makes observations about group process at times set aside by the group for this purpose.
His observational material consists of the notes, mental or written, preferably the latter, which he makes of the way the group operates and which he “feeds back” to the group upon its request, with varying degrees of interpretation. Three “levels” of observer feedback may be shown by the following examples. Descriptive: “We were not able to reach any decisions today although we discussed two problems which required decision-making.” Low-level interpretation: “There were no decisions reached today. Was it because none of us played the role of decision-initiator?” High-level interpretation: “We seemed to feel that the issues we discussed today were just too hot to handle. We were afraid to commit ourselves on them because it would mean taking sides with one or the other of the two members of our group who have strongly opposing opinions.”
Many groups have found it helpful to instruct the observer to feel free to interrupt at any time to make observations about what is happening. Or the group member who feels that the group is not making the progress it should may ask the observer to report what is going on. For example, the observer may report that the group seems to be going off on a tangent and ask the group if it concurs. If so, does it want to do something about it? Or the observer may report that there seems to be a need for authoritative information or that certain of the contributions are so general that possibly specific illustrations should be given, or that three or four members seem to be dominating the discussion, or that there seems to be a need for a recapitulation of the discussion to date by the recorder. These observations are then discussed objectively by the group and it decides what it wants to do about them.
Since the role of observer is new to most groups, it is important that the group be prepared for the introduction of this function into its operation. The role of the observer should be discussed and, if appropriate, demonstrated through role-playing. The group should accept the desirability of the observer before the role is put into practice. Group members who take the role of observer must, if they are to serve the group well, maintain good relations with the group members. Observations should be made objectively, in terms of the group’s problem, and in terms of roles, forces, and situations rather than of persons. The observer must never permit himself to compete with the designated chairman, but rather to work with him in a team relationship. In the early stages of experience with group observations it may be desirable to limit observations to such general points as problems of communication, goal direction, and pattern of participation.