Page 257 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J
P. 257

240                 Chapter 9

                                   should accept the first proposal” to “OK, let’s reject the first proposal.” A transition
                                   is needed; the ambiguity provides this transition, which allows the member to move
                                   from “I think we should accept the first proposal” to “Maybe you are right. There
                                   might be some problems with the first proposal that I hadn’t considered. Let’s look at
                                   it more closely before we decide.” Members move gradually toward a common group
                                   position. Near the end of this phase a consensus decision emerges, sometimes sud-
                                   denly. The members usually know when this point is reached, and they all indicate
                                   support for the decision. If members do not reach this point, they may need to resolve
                                   the disagreement by majority vote.

                                   Reinforcement After a group has accomplished its primary objective, it doesn’t just
                                   immediately move on to a different problem or disband. Members reinforce each
                                   other and themselves for a job well done. They say such things as, “Wow, it took a
                                   long time, but we got some really important things done,” or “I really like the pro-
                                   posal. It’s going to work beautifully,” or “I’m proud of us for coming up with this. You
                                   are super and this has been a rewarding experience.” Members pat each other on the
                                   back and reinforce the positive feelings they have toward the decision and toward each
                                   other.
                                      Fisher believed that unless some outside factor (like severe time pressure) inter-
                                   feres with the group’s natural decision- making process, these phases will follow each
                                   other in a predictable way, although the proportion of time spent in each phase may
                                   vary from decision to decision. It is important to recall, however, that he studied inter-
                                   action in previously developed groups that had already passed through their forma-
                                   tion stage.
                                      Poole’s more recent investigations have called into question the idea that most
                                                                                    55
                                   groups experience exactly the same phases, in the same order.  A number of factors
                                   influence not only what phases groups experience but also in what order the phases
                                   occur.  For example, some groups experience long, drawn- out conflict phases with
                                       56
                                   little socioemotional integration after the conflict. Others experience lengthy periods
                                   of idea development with no overt conflict.
                                      Poole’s contingency model of group decision making describes three types of
                                   factors that affect phasic progression: objective task characteristics, group task char-
                                                                        57
                                   acteristics, and group structural characteristics.  Objective task characteristics include
                                   such factors as goal clarity and potential impact of the decision. For example, if the
                                   group’s goal is clear at the beginning of the process, members may be able to shorten
                                   the orientation phase. Group task characteristics include such factors as time and pop-
                                   ulation familiarity. Members are more likely to spend extra time orienting themselves
                                   to the task and arguing the merits of various options for a novel task that is unfamiliar
                                   to them than for a familiar one. Finally, group structural characteristics refer to how
                                   members of the group work together and include such factors as cohesiveness, con-
                                   flict, and history. Members who have experienced divisive conflict may either run
                                   away from potential arguments in the group or may approach group meetings with
                                   their defenses up and boxing gloves on.












          gal37018_ch09_225_258.indd   240                                                              3/28/18   12:37 PM
   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262