The stages of group development

The stage of orientation

The two tasks confronting group members during the initial stage are: first, they must
determine a way of achieving their primary tasks- the purpose for which they joined
the group the group; second, they must find a place for themselves in the group, one
that will not only provide the comfort necessary to attain their primary task, but will
also result in additional gratification from the pleasure of group membership. In
achieving these two tasks, the group member’s behavioral patterns are basically
attempts at warding off anxiety. The main concern of the members is whether they
are “in” or “out” of the group. They search for a role for themselves in the group,
wondering if they will be liked and respected or ignored and rejected. To handle
anxiety, they invest most of their energy in a search for approval, acceptance,
respect or domination. Consequently, the content and the style of communication,
during the initial stage are relatively limited, repetitious and restrained. It is not
suprising to observe that during this stage members are careful with their choice of
words because they are not sure how they will be taken by others in the group.
Members may endlessly discuss topics of apparently little substantive interest to any
of the participants; however, these topics serve as vehicles to explore how they
perceived by co-members. With these exploratory attempts, a member eventually
discovers who responds favorably to him, who sees things the way he does, whom
to fear, and to respect. Gradually he begins to formulate a picture of the role he will
play in the group.

Another common experience in the group is the search for similarities. Members try
hard to let others know that they are similar with everyone in the group. This
experience offers great support to members and provides part of the foundation on
which group cohesiveness will eventually develop.

Giving and seeking advice is another characteristic of the early group. Members
attempt to share some type of practical solution; however, this is rarely of any
functional value except as a vehicle through which members can engage in social
relationships in the group.

Thus, the early group can be described as grouping, testing, reluctant group. It is
also a dependent one. The members expect the leader to provide the group with
structure and answers. They look to the leader for approval and acceptance.
Members demonstrate behavior which in the past has gained approval from
authority. The leader’s early remarks are carefully analyzed for guidelines about
desirable and undesirable behavior. Many of the comments in the group are directed
at or through the leader.
The stage of conflict

This stage is characterized by the group’s concern over dominance, control and
power. The experience on conflict is between members or between member and the
leader. Each member tries to establish for himself his preferred amount of initiative
and power, and gradually a control hierarchy within the group is established.

Members become judgemental of others. Negative comments and inter-members

criticism become more frequent. Members make suggestions or give advice, not as a
manifestation of acceptance and understanding but as part of their attempts to
establish their places in the control hierarchy within the group.

The struggle for control is part of the dynamic of every group; it is always present,
sometimes too tranquil to be recognized, at other times suppressed, and at some
other time may become a full blown expression akin to blazing fire.

The emergence of hostility toward the leader is an inevitable occurrence in the life
sequence of the group. While hostility toward the leader may be present even as
early as stage one, hostility toward the leader becomes more obvious in stage two,
the sources of hostility toward leader becomes clear when we recall the members;
perceptions of the leader in stage one, the members’ expectations of him as a
powerful being are so limitless that regardless of his competence, he will disappoint
them. Gradually, as the recognition of his limitations becomes obvious, members
start to feel disappointed about his behavior. Ny no means is this a clearly conscious
process. The members may intellectually advocate democratic group which draws
on its own resources. However, they may on a deeper level wish for dependency and
attempt first to create and then to destroy an authority figure. The leader refuses to
fill the traditional authority role: he does not lead in the ordinary manner; he does not
provide answers and solutions; he urges the group to explore and to mobilize its own
resources. The members’ wish lingers however and it is usually only after several
sessions that the group comes to realize are wishing for an “old time” leader.

Another source of resentment toward the leader stems from the gradual recognition
by each member that he will not be the leader’s favorite “group member”. He begins
to realize that that the leader is no more interested in him than in the others. This
leads to the emergence of rivalrous, hostile feelings toward the other members.

To overcome the anxiety that the members experience at this stage, counter-
dependent expressions (fight) begin to replace the over- dependency stage. The
group may be divided into competing groups – each subgroup is unable to give up
power. Without proper intervention, this may lead to a group that moves rapidly
toward extinction, where there is splintering into two or three subgroups. Moreover,
drop out rate is high at this point as group members that are not committed to either
subgroup attempt to handle and resolve their conflict by leaving the group.

With the necessary interventions employed, the group can be helped to resolve the
issues on dependence (stage one) and authority (stage two). New values and
behavioral patterns emerge out of the emotional experiences of stages one and two.
The group members begin to accept their full share of responsibility for what
happens in the group. The group begins to experience independence as it goes
through the last two stages of intimacy and interdependence.

The stage of cohesiveness

Following the previous period of conflict, the group gradually develops into a
cohesive unit. During this stage, there is an increase of morale and mutual trust as
members feel group belongingness. Consequently, members are willing to share
more about themselves to others in the group. There is intensification of personal
involvement, a growing awareness and mutual recognition of the significance of the
group experience in terms of personality growth and change. The chief concern of
the group is with intimacy and closeness. Anxieties have to do with not being like or
close enough to people, or with being too intimate.

Although members experience a greater freedom to talk about themselves, there

may be communication restrictions of some kind; often the group supresses all
expression of negative feelings in order to maintain a harmonious atmosphere. The
members, in a sense unite against the world, with much inter- member support,
much pride in the group, and much condemnation of the member’s “enemies”
outside the group. Eventually, however, the group’s cohesiveness or feelings of unity
will seem ritualistic unless the hostility in the group is permitted to develop. Only
when all feelings can be expressed and constructively worked through in a cohesive
group does the group become a mature work group.

The work group stage

During this stage, the uniqueness of the members and the leaders are seen and
expected. Members can accept one another’s differences without associating “good”
and “bad” with the differences. They become aware of their own involvement, and of
the other aspects of group process, without being overwhelmed or alarmed. Conflict
exists but these are on substantive issues rather than emotional ones. Consensus is
reached from a rational discussion rather then from a compulsive attempt at
unanimity. The group become a feedback vehicle where members can clarify and
evaluate each other’s perceptions and the group process. There emerges a group
system for mutual support for individuality; and, where needed, there develops in the
group, consistent control when individual behavior becomes group- destructive.
From a sense of group identity comes a sense of individual indentiy.

The state of the mature work group may last for the remainder of the group’s life,
with periodic short- lived repetitions of earlier stages. During the stage of advanced
work group or true teamwork, the tension is between “work” or progress, and
regression to an earlier stage.

The nursing interventions, tasks, and techniques can help minimize the group’s
tendencies for regression at an earlier stage, or these can help minimize the effects
of regression on group members or on the group process.

The Termination Stage

After being together and working on specified “tasks”, members of groups

experience a sense of ending. Sometimes this can be temporary as when a
particular session or meeting ends. At other times this can be a permanent one,
when the group’s reason for being end, as when a project or program has been
accomplished. According to Dunphy (1965, pp. 384-399), the tasks of the group at
this stage may include: finishing the agenda, establishing key decisions and
completing the group product, trying up loose ends and writing oft unfinished
business. The key emotions are joy and sadness. The group celebrates for the work
and achievements done. However, there is emotional coping with the loss of valued
personal relationships. There is a joking, laughing, ritual (parties, graduation, etc.)
and expressions of sorrow or withdrawal.

The Various Stages at Work

Although the stages can be described as such, the developmental sequence should
not be taken literally. The stages are rarely demarcated. There is considerable
overlapping of the boundaries between them. The group may go through the various
stages in one session. It may, however, experience the manifestations of one stage
quite dominant in one session and those of the next stage in a subsequent session.
It is to be made clear also that rarely does the group permanently graduate from one
stage, in describing, group formation or group growth, William Schutz (1965, pp.
123- 135), uses the analogy of tightening the belts of the wheel one after another just
enough so that the wheel is in place; then the process is repeated, each bolt
tightened in turn until the wheel is entirely secure. In a similar fashion, the stages of
a group return agian