Theories and Models
In the early seventies, Hill and Grunner (1973) reported that more than 100 theories of group development existed. Since then, other theories have emerged as well as attempts at contrasting and synthesizing them. As a result, a number of typologies of group change theories have been proposed. A typology advanced by George Smith (2001) based on the work of Mennecke and his colleagues (1992) classifies theories based on whether they perceive change to occur in a linear fashion, through cycles of activities, or through processes that combine both paths of change, or which are completely non-phasic. Other typologies are based on whether the primary forces promoting change and stability in a group are internal or external to the group. A third framework advanced by Andrew Van de Ven and Marshall Scott Poole (1995), differentiates theories based on four distinct "motors" for generating change. According to this framework, the following four types of group development models exist:
| Life cycle models: | Describe the process of change as the unfolding of a prescribed and linear sequence of stages following a program that is prefigured at the beginning of the cycle (decided within the group or imposed on it). |
| Teleological models: | Describe change as a purposeful movement toward one or more goals, with adjustments based on feedback from the environment. |
| Dialectical models: | Describe change as emerging from conflict between opposing entities and eventual synthesis leading to the next cycle of conflict |
| Evolutionary models: | Describe change as emerging from a repeated cycle of variation, selection and retention and generally apply to change in a population rather than change within an entity over time. |
Some theories allow for combinations and interactions among these four "motors". For example, Poole (see below) found in his empirical research that seemingly complex patterns of behavior in group decision making result from the interplay of life-cycle and teleological motors.
An important observation made by McGrath and Tschan (2004) regarding the different models of group development found in the literature is that different models might explain different aspects of the history of a group. On the one hand, some models treat the group as an entity and describe its stages of development as a functioning unit or "intact system" (p. 101). In this case, the models should be independent of the specific details of the task that the group is performing. On the other hand, some models might describe phases of the group's task performance and, because of this, tend to be very sensitive to the type of task that the group is engaged in (the "acting system", p. 101).
Below are descriptions of the central elements of some of the most common models of group development (See Smith, 2001 and Van de Ven & Poole, 1996 for a more complete list of theories and models).
Read more about this topic: Group Development
Famous quotes containing the words theories and, theories and/or models:
“Philosophers of science constantly discuss theories and representation of reality, but say almost nothing about experiment, technology, or the use of knowledge to alter the world. This is odd, because ‘experimental method’ used to be just another name for scientific method.... I hope [to] initiate a Back-to-Bacon movement, in which we attend more seriously to experimental science. Experimentation has a life of its own.”
—Ian Hacking (b. 1936)
“Our books of science, as they improve in accuracy, are in danger of losing the freshness and vigor and readiness to appreciate the real laws of Nature, which is a marked merit in the ofttimes false theories of the ancients.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“Friends broaden our horizons. They serve as new models with whom we can identify. They allow us to be ourselves—and accept us that way. They enhance our self-esteem because they think we’re okay, because we matter to them. And because they matter to us—for various reasons, at various levels of intensity—they enrich the quality of our emotional life.”
—Judith Viorst (20th century)