1) SCHUTZ (1970)

Schutz suggests three linear phases, but introduces the notion of circularity and spiralling. Expressed simply, this means that group development can reverse and repeat sequences. They can also move forward by apparently going back through stages and even by going around in circles. The three stages in group development suggested by Schutz are:

The Inclusion Phase:

This refers to the desire of participants to connect to and associate with other people - to want interaction and relationship. This is a period when group members are becoming familiar with each other, though they have not yet formed close ties. There may be restlessness, tension and mobility. Members are evaluating and probing each other for mutual or complementary interests, exploring possibilities and beginning some preliminary pairing. The central issue for members at this stage is to belong to the group or not

The Control Phase:

Next, control issues become prominent. Control behaviour is the independent and assertive activity of group members in the areas of power, authority, status, influence, decision-making and communications. At this stage, the group starts to differentiate and develop a social structure. People assume or are ascribed roles and functions, positions and ranks. Cliques form and alliances are made as members jockey for status and power. Group members often compete against any formal authority vested in the group leader. The discomfort of creating and adjusting to a new social structure can manifest itself in a variety of behaviours such as: hostility, scapegoating, withdrawal, sub-grouping, power struggles and deviance which take members away from each other and pit them against each other. A previously docile group or compliant group can suddenly erupt into conflict, bickering and apparent mutiny! While groups can get stuck in this phase, the turmoil can bring with it much potential for reconstituting the group relationships on a higher level of involvement.

The Affection Stage:

This stage is about building emotional ties and deciding on the degree of intimacy to be developed with the other group members. In this phase, the group assumes an importance for members. There is a sense of identity and pulling together. Participation and involvement increase. Members are more sensitive to each other. The interpersonal relationships stabilize and it is possible to observe the heightened emotional feeling between pairs of members, triads, and sub-groups.

2) TUCKMAN (1965)

Tuckman's is a linear model. A group passes through the first stage on to the second and so on until reaching the final stage as an effectively performing group. Tuckman's approach was to bring together numerous studies by other researchers. He came up with 4 stages of group development:

Forming:

exploring what the group will be like, finding the basis of forming relationships with others. Finding out who they are, acceptance of whoever is in the formal leadership role. Tuckman sees orientation, testing and the establishment of dependency relationships by group members as the chief characteristic of this phase.

Storming:

conflicts break out as subgroups emerge, differences are confronted, control becomes an open issue and is resisted, regardless of its source....including a formal leader.

Norming:

rules start to emerge about acceptable ways of behaving and of carrying out the task of the group; these rules are allied in working with conflicts and a spirit of cooperation develops. Intimate, personal opinions are expressed

Performing:

conflicts are resolved, energy is put into task accomplishment -the group is becoming effective. The group has evolved to the point where it is supportive of task performance. Roles have become flexible and functional and group energy is channelled into the task. Members begin to acknowledge each other's uniqueness and permit individual differences to emerge. The standards and norms of behaviour are established.

Tuckman was actually quite critical of the idea of producing a generalized theory to apply to different types of groups in different situations. However, this model is widely known and applied by people using groups. Not all groups follow these stages exactly and no allowance is made for the context and history of a particular group, who the people are and what their task or purpose is.

WEAKNESSES:

This model of group behaviour, like all models, can be misused is applied too rigidly and uncritically. For example, they can obscure what is really going on - and can distract attention away from the really issue. A group of dissatisfied participants can indicate that something is fundamentally wrong with the way a course or group is being run. It is important that such theories or models are used to illuminate the dynamics of the group, rather than be used to rationalise the limitations of the group leader.

A second possible weakness with Tuckman's model is the fact that it is not value-free. Themes of effective performance and conflict resolution are more applicable to some types of group activity than others, and certainly do not indicate universal ways of seeing the world. They should, therefore, be treated with some caution.

OVERALL:

Developmental theories of group processes can be extremely useful in making sense of what happens in groups, and for developing strategies for responding. They are easy to understand and remember. However, like any theory or model, groups rarely behave as suggested in reality. These models can offer pointers and markers if they are used flexibly, rather than slavishly.

References:

References:

Benson, J. F. (1987)

Working More Creatively with Groups, London: Routledge

Reynolds, M. (1994)

Groupwork in Education & Training: Ideas in Practice, London: Kogan Page.

Schutz, W. (1970)

Profound Simplicity, London: Turnstone Books.

Tuckman, B.W. (1965)

Developmental sequence in small groups, Psychological Bulletin, 63, 6: 384-99.