It is important to establish a framework upon which may be draped the many diverse ideas regarding group formation, group action, group goals, and group methods. These ideas are not simple, and it is necessary to distill, refine and organize them in such a manner that the reader can marshall them wisely into an appreciation of the principles of human relations inherent in group behavior. The group leader looking for a “bag of tricks” or a set of rules to apply to all situations will be disappointed. Analytical diagnosis of the social situation must always come before application.
Let us begin with an oversimplification. All forms of life have requirements for existence which they try to satisfy. Man differs in that he is a telic being; he can project his thoughts and desires into the future. He is thus motivated and acts with regard to certain objectives. Through his thinking process he sets up goals toward which he strives, and his actions have meaning only in relation to such objectives.
To state this another way: Since man alone is able to think, he alone selects goals which represent desires as well as needs. Having desired, and having established goals, he proceeds to act in such a way as he thinks will enable him to reach these goals.
The same basic analysis can be applied to groups, since they are made up of individuals. Groups also have desires and act to satisfy them. To attain their goals they must employ certain means.
Here then is the most elementary breakdown of the group process: Groups, like individuals, develop wants and desires, some of which they establish as goals. In their effort to achieve those goals they select certain techniques. These are the three basic elements in the group process: the group, the goals, and the techniques.
Simplified pictures of complicated subjects should never be taken completely literally. The comparison just drawn between individual and group behavior is a case in point. The individual, within his own mental capabilities and background, chooses his goals and adopts his means largely of his own volition, even though this is modified by the social groups in which he moves or would like to move. Group choices, either of goals or of means, are a product of the interaction of many forces within the individual members, between the individual members, and in response to external pressures. Thus the individual choice may represent a fairly simple, straightforward, action and reaction. Any action on the part of a group represents a resolution of numerous forces which must in some way be directed.
The Group
This can be illustrated schematically by a circle, which represents the group. To further simplify the problem, it will be assumed that the group already exists and that certain motivations are at work. The small figures within the circle represent the individual members. The arrows, large and small, represent various forces at work.
The individual member is unique in that he is different from every other member. He brings to the group certain general and specific interests, drives, and motivations. He has certain expectations and aspirations which he mayor may not have translated into goals. He brings with him definite values, attitudes, habits, feelings, and beliefs. These things, which have applied largely to himself, he now also applies to the group members and to the group as a whole.
These basic individual drives are indicated by the small arrows beside each figure.
While all the above-listed individual traits might be referred to as positive forces, it must be remembered that the individual also brings to the group certain negative forces. He is a human being with premonitions, frustrations, inhibitions, and fears. He has developed certain adjustment patterns to his past failures. He introduces these patterns into the group, as illustrated by the small dotted arrows about the individual figure. There are other negative traits. Perhaps the member is not really interested in the group or its goals but brings an ulterior motive, a “hidden agenda” such as personal gains. He may have a self image of the role he would like to play in the group. This may be a totally different role than that for which he is fitted.
In the process of interaction within the group, certain new forces arise – forces which originate in the individual, it is true, but occurs only because of his interaction with the other members.
These lines of force which arise out of group relationships are illustrated by the arrows with long, broken shafts. Notice that they join each member with every other member, and also each member to the group as a whole. An individual reacts not only to other individuals in the group but also to the fact that he is a member of the group.
It is difficult to express these forces in familiar terms.
Authors speak of the atmosphere or climate of a group, of communication patterns, of “we-feelings,” of general role definition, of group standards, and of human relation skills, to name only a few. For present purposes it will probably suffice to speak of lines of force generated within the individual, and lines of force generated as a result of individuals reacting with each other and with the group as a whole. Together, they are commonly called the internal dynamics of group behavior.
Further energies exert themselves on the group. No group operates in a vacuum and the norms of the culture of which the group is a part exercise a constant pressure from without. This is illustrated by the solid arrows, and their summation makes up the external dynamics of the group. Every group feels the force of the community or societal value system of which it is a part; it will probably take up and carry out certain actions which are “acceptable” and reject others which are not acceptable.
As one example of external forces which impinge upon the group, every group has other groups to which it “refers” to determine what its actions should be, or how acceptable its past actions have been. These may be called “reference groups” and may be subdivided into two types, normative and comparative.
Normative reference groups have expectation patterns (norms) together with some ability to enforce these norms on others. A typical normative reference group is the “community” which expects each group to perform certain functions for certain purposes and for certain people. Through social pressure, the giving of recognition and “status,” the community has the power to more or less enforce these expectations. The “parent” organization of any local group (for example the state organization of the P.T.A.) is also a normative reference group and demands certain performance from its affiliated local groups.
Comparative reference groups are groups with which other groups compare themselves. Possibly they are groups which it seems desirable to imitate, or groups whose errors it would seem desirable to avoid. These reference groups influence the membership, objectives, and activities of other groups and help to set the prestige rating of the group in the community. These are only some of the external forces which prod, impede, or maintain status quo in groups and which will be discussed in more detail.