Phases in group problem-solving.

Abstract

HE idea that groups go through certain stages or phases in the process of solving problems, or that problem solving would somehow be more effective if some prescribed order were followed, has been current in the literature for some time (4, 5, 10). However, the distinction between predicting an empirical order of phases under given conditions and prescribing an ideal order in terms of value judgments has not in all cases been clearly drawn. Furthermore, it has not always been recognized that different types of conditions or problems may result empirically in different sorts of phase movement. The persistence of these confusions has probably been related to the fact that until recently empirical methods which would give operational substance to the ideas have been lacking.This paper presents a method of testing for the empirical existence of differentiated phases in group process and some evidence that under certain particular conditions a certain type of phase movement does tend to appear. The type of phase movement described is not held to be universal in an empirical sense. Whether it appears empirically depends upon a large number of conditions. Whether this type of phase movement is "optimum" under certain conditions in terms of value standards is a different problem and is not discussed in this paper. However, it is suggested that the method described here provides some tools for attacking this problem.By "phases" in the hypothesis presented below, we mean qualitatively different subperiods within a total continuous period of 1 This research was facilitated by the Laboratory of Social Relations, Harvard University. Earlier related work has already been described (2). The writers wish to acknowledge the assistance of Theodore M. Mills and Mary E. Roseborough in the collection of the data reported in this paper, and suggestions for analysis made by Frederick Mosteller.

The relationship between high performance and knowledge about how to master cooperation situations

“…We will describe the situation from the perspective of Person A. Based on earlier work on problem solving as well as work on group and cooperation processes (Bales and Strodtbeck, 1951;Lipshitz and Bar-Ilan, 1996;McGrath, 1984) we assume that task accomplishment in a cooperation situation requires various types of actions: (a) analysing the problem; (b) addressing the task directly; (c) addressing the cooperation partner (Person B) by focusing on the interpersonal aspects of the relationship; (d) addressing the way the cooperation partner (Person B) approaches the task. …”

Volunteer Meanings in the Making of Place

“…Task accomplishment refers to activities that move people toward specific goals, which are generally related to a particular project in a specific field of interest. Task accomplishment processes can be thought of as having five stages or episodes (Bales & Strodtbeck, 1951;Wilkinson, 1970bWilkinson, , 1991). Wilkinson's (1970bWilkinson's ( , 1991 articulation of these included: (1) initiation and spread of interest, (2) organization of sponsorship, (3) goal setting and strategy formation, (4) recruitment, and (5) implementation.…”

The Effect of Teambuilding on Team Development: A Quasi-Experiment within a Swedish State Authority

“…The integrated model is an integration of earlier theory and research on team development across time [7,[9][10][11][12]. The validity of the IMGD and GDQ has been established in a number of studies [8,[13][14][15].…”