Group dynamics
Group dynamics is a system of behaviors and psychological processes occurring within a social group, or between social groups. The study of group dynamics can be useful in understanding decision-making behavior, tracking the spread of diseases in society, creating effective therapy techniques, and following the emergence and popularity of new ideas and technologies. These applications of the field are studied in psychology, sociology, anthropology, political science, epidemiology, education, social work, leadership studies, business and managerial studies, as well as communication studies.
History
The history of group dynamics has a consistent, underlying premise: "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." A social group is an entity that has qualities which cannot be understood just by studying the individuals that make up the group. In 1924, Gestalt psychologist Max Wertheimer proposed "There are entities where the behaviour of the whole cannot be derived from its individual elements nor from the way these elements fit together; rather the opposite is true: the properties of any of the parts are determined by the intrinsic structural laws of the whole".As a field of study, group dynamics has roots in both psychology and sociology. Wilhelm Wundt, credited as the founder of experimental psychology, had a particular interest in the psychology of communities, which he believed possessed phenomena that could not be described through a study of the individual. On the sociological side, Émile Durkheim, who was influenced by Wundt, also recognized collective phenomena, such as public knowledge. Other key theorists include Gustave Le Bon who believed that crowds possessed a 'racial unconscious' with primitive, aggressive, and antisocial instincts, and William McDougall, who believed in a 'group mind,' which had a distinct existence born from the interaction of individuals.
Eventually, the social psychologist Kurt Lewin coined the term group dynamics to describe the positive and negative forces within groups of people. In 1945, he established The Group Dynamics Research Center at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the first institute devoted explicitly to the study of group dynamics. Throughout his career, Lewin was focused on how the study of group dynamics could be applied to real-world, social issues.
Increasingly, research has applied evolutionary psychology principles to group dynamics. As humans' social environments became more complex, they acquired adaptations by way of group dynamics that enhance survival. Examples include mechanisms for dealing with status, reciprocity, identifying cheaters, ostracism, altruism, group decision, leadership, and intergroup relations.
Key theorists
Gustave Le Bon
Gustave Le Bon was a French social psychologist whose seminal study, The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind led to the development of group psychology.William McDougall
The British psychologist William McDougall in his work The Group Mind researched the dynamics of groups of various sizes and degrees of organization.Sigmund Freud
In Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego,, Sigmund Freud based his preliminary description of group psychology on Le Bon's work, but went on to develop his own, original theory, related to what he had begun to elaborate in Totem and Taboo. Theodor Adorno reprised Freud's essay in 1951 with his Freudian Theory and the Pattern of Fascist Propaganda, and said that "It is not an overstatement if we say that Freud, though he was hardly interested in the political phase of the problem, clearly foresaw the rise and nature of fascist mass movements in purely psychological categories."Jacob L. Moreno
Jacob L. Moreno was a psychiatrist, dramatist, philosopher and theoretician who coined the term "group psychotherapy" in the early 1930s and was highly influential at the time.Kurt Lewin
Kurt Lewin is commonly identified as the founder of the movement to study groups scientifically. He coined the term group dynamics to describe the way groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances.William Schutz
William Schutz looked at interpersonal relations as stage-developmental, inclusion, control, and affection. Schutz sees groups resolving each issue in turn in order to be able to progress to the next stage.Conversely, a struggling group can devolve to an earlier stage, if unable to resolve outstanding issues at its present stage.
Schutz referred to these group dynamics as "the interpersonal underworld," group processes which are largely unseen and un-acknowledged, as opposed to "content" issues, which are nominally the agenda of group meetings.
Wilfred Bion
Wilfred Bion studied group dynamics from a psychoanalytic perspective, and stated that he was much influenced by Wilfred Trotter for whom he worked at University College Hospital London, as did another key figure in the Psychoanalytic movement, Ernest Jones. He discovered several mass group processes which involved the group as a whole adopting an orientation which, in his opinion, interfered with the ability of a group to accomplish the work it was nominally engaged in. Bion's experiences are reported in his published books, especially Experiences in Groups. The Tavistock Institute has further developed and applied the theory and practices developed by Bion.Bruce Tuckman
Bruce Tuckman proposed the four-stage model called Tuckman's Stages for a group. Tuckman's model states that the ideal group decision-making process should occur in four stages:- Forming
- Storming
- Norming
- Performing
M. Scott Peck
M. Scott Peck developed stages for larger-scale groups which are similar to Tuckman's stages of group development. Peck describes the stages of a community as:- Pseudo-community
- Chaos
- Emptiness
- True Community
Richard Hackman
Richard Hackman developed a synthetic, research-based model for designing and managing work groups. Hackman suggested that groups are successful when they satisfy internal and external clients, develop capabilities to perform in the future, and when members find meaning and satisfaction in the group. Hackman proposed five conditions that increase the chance that groups will be successful. These include:- Being a real team: which results from having a shared task, clear boundaries which clarify who is inside or outside of the group, and stability in group membership.
- Compelling direction: which results from a clear, challenging, and consequential goal.
- Enabling structure: which results from having tasks which have variety, a group size that is not too large, talented group members who have at least moderate social skill, and strong norms that specify appropriate behaviour.
- Supportive context: which occurs in groups nested in larger groups reward systems that reward performance and cooperation an educational system that develops member skills, c) an information and materials system that provides the needed information and raw materials.
- Expert coaching: which occurs on the rare occasions when group members feel they need help with task or interpersonal issues. Hackman emphasizes that many team leaders are overbearing and undermine group effectiveness.
Intragroup dynamics
The dynamics of a particular group depend on how one defines the boundaries of the group. Often, there are distinct subgroups within a more broadly defined group. For example, one could define U.S. residents as a group, but could also define a more specific set of U.S. residents. For each of these groups, there are distinct dynamics that can be discussed. Notably, on this very broad level, the study of group dynamics is similar to the study of culture. For example, there are group dynamics in the U.S. South that sustain a culture of honor, which is associated with norms of toughness, honour-related violence, and self-defence.
Group formation
starts with a psychological bond between individuals. The social cohesion approach suggests that group formation comes out of bonds of interpersonal attraction. In contrast, the social identity approach suggests that a group starts when a collection of individuals perceive that they share some social category, and that interpersonal attraction only secondarily enhances the connection between individuals. Additionally, from the social identity approach, group formation involves both identifying with some individuals and explicitly not identifying with others. So to say, a level of psychological distinctiveness is necessary for group formation. Through interaction, individuals begin to develop group norms, roles, and attitudes which define the group, and are internalized to influence behaviour.Emergent groups arise from a relatively spontaneous process of group formation. For example, in response to a natural disaster, an emergent response group may form. These groups are characterized as having no preexisting structure or prior experience working together. Yet, these groups still express high levels of interdependence and coordinate knowledge, resources, and tasks.