Page 344 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

Tools for Assessing and Evaluating Groups 327

TABLE 12.2 Preference for procedural order

The following scale assesses your preference for procedural order. Indicate how much you agree or
disagree with each statement by circling the appropriate response. Add the numbers you have circled.
The higher the number, the more you prefer orderly, systematic group discussions.
Strongly Strongly
Statement During Group Work, I Agree Neither Disagree

1. Request or suggest deadlines for the 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
group to follow.
2. Request or suggest agendas, task lists, 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
or ranking of alternatives.
3. Request or make statements about 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
group goals.
4. Suggest signposts to signal the start of 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
group meetings.
5. Summarize/integrate contributions of 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
members during a meeting.
6. Suggest or request division of labor 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
among group members.
7. Suggest ways to implement a task or 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
course of action.
8. Request direction about procedures for 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
the group to follow.
9. Ask questions and make comments to 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
clarify specific procedures.
10. Keep discussions task-related by 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
following agenda topics.
Total

Source: Adapted from Linda L. Putnam, “Preference for Procedural Order in Task-Oriented Small Groups,” Communication Monographs,
16 (August 1979): 212.

group discussion to be orderly and organized. A self-rating of assertiveness is provided
in Table 12.3; changing the wording slightly turns this scale from a self-rating scale to
an other-rating scale. Instead of asking about your “best judgment of my own” degree
of assertiveness, ask about your “best judgment of Sally’s degree of assertiveness.”
The Conflict Management Style Orientation Scale in Table 12.4 is based on the
Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument and assesses the extent to which, in
conflict situations, you tend to avoid, accommodate (give in), compete (argue to win),
compromise, or collaborate (work with the other person to find a satisfactory
solution). Finally, Table 12.5 provides a self-rating scale that a discussion leader can
use to evaluate his or her own performance. Had Sam completed this, he might have
had an “ah ha” reaction to realize where his leadership behaviors could have been
modified to help the group.

gal37018_ch12_321_352.indd 327 3/28/18 12:38 PM