TECHNICAL APPENDIX C

PROCESSING TEAMWORK

Team Evaluation Procedure

A simple method for processing teamwork would be to close each meeting with an evaluative summary of the meeting. A brief form on which team members could reply to a set of evaluation questions might be drawn up and copied for distribution to the members, or the same questions could be asked and discussed orally. Whether written or discussed, some 15 to 20 minutes should be allotted to the procedure, and each team member's opinion should be obtained about:

1. The meeting's accomplishments

2. The meeting's frustrations

3. What should be done to improve meetings

4. What was most helpful during the meeting

This type of evaluation procedure can be easily adjusted so that regular evaluations can be made at less frequent intervals, e.g., every fourth meeting.

What to Look for in Groups*

*This exercise is taken from J. William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones (eds.), The 1972 Annual Handbook For Group Facilitators, pp. 21-24. La Jolla, CA: University Associates, Inc., 1972, and is reprinted with their permission.

In all human interactions there are two major ingredients--content and process. The first deals with the subject matter or the task upon which the group is working. In most interactions, the focus of attention of all persons is on the content. The second ingredient, process, is concerned with what is happening between and to group members while the group is working. Group process, or dynamics, deals with such items as morale, feeling, tone, atmosphere, influence, participation, styles of influence, leadership struggles, conflict, competition, cooperation, etc. In most interactions, very little attention is paid to process, even when it is the major cause of ineffective group action. Sensitivity to group process will better enable one to diagnose group problems early and deal with them more effectively. Since these processes are present in all groups, awareness of them will enhance a person's worth to a group and enable him to be a more effective group participant.

Below are some observation guidelines to help one process analyze group behavior.

Participation

One indication of involvement is verbal participation. Look for differences in the amount of participation among members.

1. Who are the high participators?

2. Who are the low participators?

3. Do you see any shift in participation, e.g., highs become quiet, lows suddenly become talkative. Do you see any possible reason for this in the group's interaction?

4. How are the silent people treated? How is their silence interpreted? Consent? Disagreement? Disinterest? Fear? etc.

5. Who talks to whom? Do you see any reason for this in the group's interactions?

6. Who keeps the ball rolling? Why? Do you see any reason for this in the group's interactions?

Influence

Influence and participation are not the same. Some people may speak very little, yet they capture the attention of the whole group. Others may talk a lot but are generally not listened to by other members.

7. Which members are high in influence? That is, when they talk others seem to listen.

8. Which members are low in influence? Others do not listen to or follow them. Is there any shifting in influence? Who shifts?

9. Do you see any rivalry in the group? Is there a struggle for leadership? What effect does it have on other group members?

Styles of Influence

Influence can take many forms. It can be positive or negative; it can enlist the support or cooperation of others or alienate them. How a person attempts to influence another may be the crucial factor in determining how open or closed the other will be toward being influenced. Items 10 through 13 are suggestive of four styles that frequently emerge in groups.

10. Autocratic: Does anyone attempt to impose his will or values on other group members or try to push them to support his decisions? Who evaluates or passes judgment on other group members? Do any members block action when it is not moving in the direction they desire? Who pushes to "get the group organized?"

11. Peacemaker: Who eagerly supports other group members' decisions? Does anyone consistently try to avoid conflict or unpleasant feelings from being expressed by pouring oil on the troubled waters? Is any member typically deferential toward other group members--give them power? Do any members appear to avoid giving negative feedback, i.e., who will level only when they have positive feedback to give?

12. Laissez faire: Are any group members getting attention by their apparent lack of involvement in the group? Does any group member go along with group decisions without seeming to commit himself one way or the other? Who seems to be withdrawn and uninvolved; who does not initiate activity, participates mechanically and only in response to another member's question?

13. Democratic: Does anyone try to include everyone in a group decision or discussion? Who expresses his feelings and opinions openly and directly without evaluating or judging others? Who appears to be open to feedback and criticisms from others? When feelings run high and tension mounts, which members attempt to deal with the conflict in a problem-solving way?

Decision-Making Procedures

Many kinds of decisions are made in groups without considering the effects of these decisions on other members. Some people try to impose their own decisions on the group, while others want all members to participate and share in the decisions that are made.

14. Does anyone make a decision and carry it out without checking with other group members? (Self-authorized.) For example, he decides on the topic to be discussed and immediately begins to talk about it. What effect does this have on other group members?

15. Does the group drift from topic to topic? Who topic-jumps? Do you see any reason for this in the group's interactions?

16. Who supports other members' suggestions or decisions? Does this support result in the two members deciding the topic or activity for the group (handclasp)? How does this affect other group members?

17. Is there any evidence of a majority pushing a decision through over other members' objections? Do they call for a vote (majority support)?

18. Is there any attempt to get all members participating in a decision (consensus)? What effect does this seem to have on the group?

19. Does anyone make any contributions which do not receive any kind of response or recognition (plop)? What effect does this have on the member?

Task Functions

These functions illustrate behaviors that are concerned with getting the job done or accomplishing the task that the group has before it.

20. Does anyone ask for or make suggestions as to the best way to proceed or to tackle a problem?

21. Does anyone attempt to summarize what has been covered or what has been going on in the group?

22. Is there any giving or asking for facts, ideas, opinions, feelings, feedback, or searching for alternatives?

23. Who keeps the group on target? Who prevents topic-jumping or going off on tangents?

Maintenance Functions

These functions are important to the morale of the group. They maintain good and harmonious working relationships among the members and create a group atmosphere which enables each member to contribute maximally. They ensure smooth and effective teamwork within the group.

24. Who helps others get into the discussion (gate openers)?

25. Who cuts off others or interrupts them (gate closers)?

26. How well are members getting their ideas across? Are some members preoccupied and not listening? Are there any attempts by group members to help others clarify their ideas?

27. How are ideas rejected? How do members react when their ideas are not accepted? Do members attempt to support others when they reject their ideas?

Group Atmosphere

Something about the way a group works creates an atmosphere which in turn is revealed in a general impression. In addition, people may differ in the kind of atmosphere they like in a group. Insight can be gained into the atmosphere characteristic of a group by finding words which describe the general impressions held by group members.

28. Who seems to prefer a friendly congenial atmosphere? Is there any attempt to suppress conflict or unpleasant feelings?

29. Who seems to prefer an atmosphere of conflict and disagreement? Do any members provoke or annoy others?

30. Do people seem involved and interested? Is the atmosphere one of work, play, satisfaction, taking flight, sluggishness, etc.?

Membership

A major concern for group members is the degree of acceptance or inclusion in the group. Different patterns of interaction may develop in the group which give clues to the degree and kind of membership.

31. Is there any sub-grouping? Some times two or three members may consistently agree and support each other or consistently disagree and oppose one another.

32. Do some people seem to be "outside" the group? Do some members seem to be "in"? How are those "outside" treated?

33. Do some members move in and out of the group, e.g., lean forward or backward in their chairs or move their chairs in and out? Under what conditions do they come in or move out?

Feelings

During any group discussion, feelings are frequently generated by the interactions between members. These feelings, however, are seldom talked about. Observers may have to make guesses based on tone of voice, facial expressions, gestures, and many other forms of nonverbal cues.

34. What signs of feelings do you observe in group members: anger, irritation, frustration, warmth, affection, excitement, boredom, defensiveness, competitiveness, etc.?

35. Do you see any attempts by group members to block the expression of feelings, particularly negative feelings? How is this done? Does anyone do this consistently?

Norms

Standards or ground rules may develop in a group that control the behavior of its members. Norms usually express the beliefs or desires of the majority of the group members as to what behaviors should or should not take place in the group. These norms may be clear to all members (explicit), known or sensed by only a few (implicit), or operating completely below the level of awareness of any group members. Some norms facilitate group progress and some hinder it. |

36. Are certain areas avoided in the group (e.g., sex, religion, talk about present feelings in group, discussing the leader's behavior, etc.)? Who seems to reinforce this avoidance? How do they do it?

37. Are group members overly nice or polite to each other? Are only positive feelings expressed? Do members agree with each other too readily? What happens when members disagree?

38. Do you see norms operating about participation or the kinds of questions that are allowed (e.g., "If I talk, you must talk"; "If I tell my problems you have; to tell your problems")? Do members feel free to probe each other about their feelings? Do questions tend to be restricted to intellectual topics or events outside of the group?

Process Observation: A Guide*

*This exercise is taken from J. William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones (eds.), A Handbook of Structural Experiences for Human Relations Training, pp. 45-48, Vol. 1 (Rev.). La Jolla, CA: University Associates, Inc., 1974, and is reprinted with their permission.

Goals

I. To provide feedback to a group concerning its process. :

II. To provide experience for group members in observing process variables in group meetings.

Materials

Copies of the Process Observation Report Form.

Process

Participants take turns as process observers, a different observer for each meeting. The observer does not participate in the meeting but records his impressions on the Process Observation Report Form. At the end of the meeting, the observer makes an oral report of his observations, and his report is discussed. It is helpful for the first observer to have had some experience at such observation and for participants to have copies of the form while he is reporting.

Variations

I. Sections of the observation form can be assigned to different participants in advance of the meeting.

II. Two observers can be used instead of one, to check accuracy of observations.

III. The meeting can be videotaped, and the entire group can use the form to analyze the process.

IV. The observer can participate in the meeting while he is observing.

Similar Structured Experiences: Vol. I: Structured Experience 6; Vol. II: 37, 38, 39; Vol. III: 55; '72 Annual: 79; '73 Annual: 92.

Lecturette Source: '73 Annual: "A Model of Group Development."

Notes on the use of "Process Observation":

PROCESS OBSERVATION REPORT FORM

{Insert form here}