Phases in Group Development

Abstract

Evidence contrary to the widely held view that groups move through discernible developmental phases is analyzed in detail. Definitional issues relating to "phases in group development " and "group types " are considered. Reviews and thirteen studies (to 1981) cited by others as not supporting the existence of developmental trends are mterpreted in this context. Methodological and conceptual problems are noted. The negative evidence as such does not seem persuasive. It ts concluded that researchers' attention should no longer be devoted to trying to provide a yes or no answer to the question "Do groups change?" but rather to identifying significant differences and similarities in group development among various groups and types of groups, and to relating variations in developmental processes to important group outcomes.

Measurement of Team Behaviors in a Navy Environment

“…Denson (1981) provides examples of the kinds of questions that need to be answered in order to fill the existing technological void (see similar questions in Cissna, 1984;Dyer, 1984 Kribs et al (1977).…”

“…Cissna, 1984). Thus, the concept of the overall flow of team development is more important at this point than the occurrence of specific behaviors.…”

Scientific Inquiry Into Small Group Process

“…Much has been written in an attempt to discover and articulate this point of view with regard to various group formations such as encounter, personal growth, or therapy groups (Bennis and Shepard, 1974;Lundgren, 1977;Tuckman, 1965). Group development literature constitutes one of the few examples of studying the collective group, or the group as a system (Cissna, 1984).…”

Stability, bistability, and instability in small group influence patterns.

“…In organizational theory, institutional models (e.g., Zucker, 1977Zucker, , 1987 stress the power of institutional processes to buffer established organizations against change and ensure continuity. Robust equilibrium also fits the population ecology approach to organizational change (Hannan & Freeman, 1977, 1984, which proposes that stable systems are the most "fit." This theory proposes that changes in a population of organizations occur as new organizations are formed and unsuccessful ones (especially unstable ones) dissolve, and not through changes within established groups.…”

“…Changes in these contingencies during the group's history should evoke responses by the group. To better understand the impact of both initial conditions and changes in conditions, they call for more research exploring the possibility of multiple developmental paths (Cissna, 1984;McCollom, 1995;McGrath & O'Connor, 1996;Poole & Roth, 1989b).…”