When “leader” or “leadership” is mentioned or implied in the following discussion, remember that the research evidence indicates that the broader the base of such leadership, the more efficient the group is in accomplishing its goals. The authors are also aware from a practical standpoint that ideal situations are seldom achieved and that in many groups the leadership load must be carried by the few.

To return to eariler outlined concepts, the techniques may be considered the link between the group and its objectives. It is therefore logical that in selecting a technique the leaders look both ways; toward the group and its members and toward the ends desired.

First the group – its individual members, its internal and external dynamics – should be considered. The leader must take into account the membership; their interests, drives, and skills as well as their inhibitions, blocks, and frustrations. The human individual is the unit of raw material with which the group leader must work, and the greater the leader’s knowledge of human behavior in general and of the individual concerned in particular, the more useful choices he can make.

If a person were in a group largely for the security he felt the group gave him, it might be unwise to place him in a totally new situation. It would probably not be wise to throw one who has great difficulty expressing himself into a situation where he had to give a lecture. Some other technique should be used to tap the resources which this person can contribute to the group. Techniques should be tailored to fit the individuals concerned.

Forces at work within and without the group – dynamics of the group – must be considered in any rational selection of a group method. Several, or all, of the following elements of group dynamics should enter into the selection of a technique: size, atmosphere, standards, skills available, social controls, identity, general role definition, functional unit act roles, participation, and evaluation.

Group discussion, for example, works best in a small group in which the atmosphere is democratic and permissive rather than tense and inhibited. When a group is large “buzz groups” may accomplish similar ends. This technique is a waste of time when the group is of manageable size.

The most common of all techniques, the lecture, has a serious fault. It is only one-way communication. A very effective method, “role playing,” is also dangerous when social controls, identity, and objective evaluation are on an insecure basis within the group. Recreational or musical activities are sometimes chosen to break down status stratification in a group, but if injected into the wrong situation may actually increase hostility and tension.

A full knowledge of the forces making up the internal dynamics is the most likely way of avoiding pitfalls in technique selection.

The leader’s choice of a technique will also be affected by what he sees when he looks at the external dynamics. Forces impinging upon the group from the outside may have very significant effects upon the choice of a technique. Some institutions, such as certain churches and schools, frown upon music and dancing, thus placing severe restrictions on recreational methods. Other institutions place certain functionaries above the necessity of answering to the group. It might be unacceptable to involve a member of a church hierarchy in many types of activity, even though it could be very desirable from the standpoint of ends sought.

Community expectations often cause groups to bring in “name” lecturers when a different technique entirely might be more effective. Outside consultants are often used when local people might be expected to do a better job if they were free from community pressures. Choices are affected by the attitude of the community – the external dynamics.

When the method selector looks in the other direction, toward the goals of the group, he will again see a wide and varied assortment of factors influencing his choice. It will be remembered that all goals were divided into those which were strictly informative to the group and those which ostensibly call for action. It is obvious that this division frequently calls for completely different methods. Goals were also divided into long-run and short-run objectives, and again the means of achieving them may be better adapted to one form than another.

If the purpose of a meeting is a straightforward, logical, uninterrupted presentation of a single subject the “symposium” technique might be ideal. If the varying points of view are to be presented by only two people of roughly equal qualifications, the “dialogue” is a useful technique. An interesting combination of several techniques was presented in the Nixon-Kennedy television “debates” in the 1960 presidential campaign. To tap the ideas of as many people as possible, “buzz groups” or “huddle groups” are often used to approximate the benefits of general discussion in small groups. Full group discussion may be the only way to achieve consensus, but to’ free inhibitions and create a permissive atmosphere it may be necessary to precede this with some recreational or relaxing techniques.

Another characteristic of group objectives not previously stressed is that almost invariably they are subject to subdivision. Even short-run goals can be broken down into a series of intermediate objectives, and this may also be true of single-meeting goals. Each of the resulting intermediate goals may then be approached with a different technique which would seem to apply more logically to the situation. Combined techniques are really the rule rather than the exception and are particularly used when the objectives can be fragmented.

A general example of this would occur when some group might wish to solve a certain problem – say to improve some item of group process. First, a panel discussion might be set up, with those most concerned presenting the various aspects of the problem. The moderator would have the function of getting the panel under way and of keeping the discussion on the point. An important function of this technique would be to stimulate interest of all participants and to identify essential elements. The panel discussion might end with a general colloquy which in essence would serve to complete the definition of the problem and a crystallization of the essential facts involved. The group might then go into buzz groups to discuss the problem with instructions for each to suggest a solution. Then a general discussion could follow with the aim of achieving consensus. The advantages of such a prepared series of techniques over a desultory general discussion should be obvious as should the fact that combined techniques are often the most effective solution, even to a fairly simple problem.

It should be re-emphasized that to carry out the above program the leadership needs to know much about the individual members and their personalities. Also it is important to understand the “group personality,” its internal and external dynamics, and to have a clear appreciation of the specific objectives of the group. An understanding of the basic techniques and what each might be expected to accomplish can then be applied in the selections eventually made.

It is axiomatic in the discussion of methods that each technique has a definite potential for the mobilization of individual and group forces and for directing them toward group goals. This potential can only be realized, however, when knowledge, understanding, experience, and skill are present.

Groups are as old as mankind. Some sort of technique for securing group action is certainly as old as communication, no doubt antedating oral language. With the development of languages and written history we find many references to group action techniques in religious, pre-historical, and mythological literature. We recognize the “lecture” technique. Many times we read of groups being swayed to action by forms of the lecture; for example the “harangue” or the “exhortation.”

But while group techniques are ancient, their study under scientific methods is relatively new. Revolutions in group methods accompanied the development of spoken language. They were further changed with the advent of printing and the spread of literacy. Today we may be seeing a new revolution centered around mechanical aids: tape, film, television, and amplifiers.

Everything that furthers the group process is a technique. This logically includes coffee breaks, banquets, picnics, and teas. Various types of entertainment serve a similar purpose, and result in group singing, dancing, and talent nights. The difficulty of trying to cover the entire field in detail is apparent.

In Part II, a number of specific group techniques will be discussed in detail. However, those included are rather straightforward, relatively pure types. Social creativity remains the goal of this book, and specific techniques are introduced only to establish a pattern – a study method which will aid the leader as he develops and uses more inventive methods.

Schematically represented, the technique is the connecting link between the group and its goals. Better still, techniques – or combinations of them – are the vehicles which carry the group toward its goals. A thorough knowledge and understanding of group methods is a necessary concomitant of good group membership and leadership. The more widespread this knowledge is within the group, the more mature and more efficient is the group. This understanding should be basic rather than superficial and a general discussion should precede any consideration of specific techniques.

It is desirable to re-emphasize that good group techniques are not necessarily formal or organized. Our knowledge of specific methods should not blind us to the fact that there are always informal techniques at work within any group. Group process moves by virtue of techniques, however vague, poorly defined, or unrecognized they may be. In small, mature groups with experienced leadership informal methods seem to arise spontaneously and are often the principal techniques used to effect very successful action. Under these circumstances such fluidity of methods may be entirely adequate, but far more often it is necessary to use consciously selected and often time-tried techniques to “get things moving.”

Often it is desirable to set limits on anticipated interaction, or to specify a framework within which such interaction is to be held. Sometimes it may be useful to set up a social situation in which the type of action and interaction will be fairly predictable. A group might desire to create a certain atmosphere, say of spontaneity and freedom from inhibitions. For these and many other situations there are time-tested techniques; there are also hundreds of other means, formal and informal, which can be used. Creative leadership selects proper techniques, combines techniques, or invents totally new ones to fit situations as needed.

It should again be pointed out that techniques constitute a means to an end. Individuals and whole groups occasionally fall into the error of behaving as though their methods were ends in themselves. Situations are created for the sole purpose of demonstrating a facility with a technique.

Ritual, an ancient and still common technique in certain organizations, has often become an end in itself for some individuals. The fallacy of becoming so enamored of one technique that it is used regardless of the situation is also common.

Another error often seen is the use of varied means and methods by leaders who seem to have mastered the application of the methods without understanding their true character or purpose. These leaders have learned that certain techniques work at certain times, but with little idea why.

It should be obvious by this point that while there are many time-tested techniques, good group leadership does not depend upon a “bag of tricks.” The whole basic philosophy of this book holds that there are rational processes by which good techniques can be selected and used, but that such use requires basic knowledge, a willingness to diagnose the social situation, and imagination and creativity in the ultimate application.

How then do we make choices and judgments from which good group process derives? It must be done by applying the basic knowledge of all the facets of group behavior discussed up to this point.

Sometimes a group can be carried away in their enthusiasm about starting a new project before they clearly think through to their goals. There is only one way to make sure that all members are informed about the group’s goals and objectives and that is to provide time to consider them. It is important to allow time for this, especially when a group is just getting organized. When new members are brought into a group, it is important that the goals and objectives be explained to them and perhaps later reviewed and discussed thoroughly.

Another time at which careful restudy of goals and objectives is needed is when a new program is being planned and a new core of officers is assuming responsibility. Whenever a new project or activity is undertaken, it is well to insure that all members are aware of how this new undertaking relates to the objectives of the group or organization.

An important step in setting group goals and objectives is to explore and discuss the members’ ideas on what the objectives should be. Allowance should be made for discussing modification and change until the ideas are solidified by the group into definite objectives. To insure acceptance there should be discussion and agreement upon the relative importance of these ideas. After an idea is accepted, it must be put into a meaningful statement.

The last step in setting goals and objectives before securing final group acceptance is checking against the criteria for judging objectives. A short consideration of these criteria will help a group reach right decisions.

Briefly, the steps in setting group goals and objectives are:

1. Provide time for the group to consider them.
2. Explore and discuss the ideas, interests, and needs of the group members.
3. Secure consensus on ideas, interest areas, and needs around which goals and objectives are to be formulated.
4. Formulate statements that explicitly set forth the three necessary dimensions of well-stated goals and objectives.
5. Test each goal and objective against the criteria for judging objectives.
6. Insure common understanding and acceptance by the members of the group.

Once goals and objectives are set, future group experiences tend to be shaped by them and activities can be evaluated in terms of them. The extent that the motivating interests and aims of members of a group are incorporated into its goals and objectives will affect directly the loyalty and participation of its members in the program and activities of the organization.

Several standards may be used to judge the usefulness of objectives. An organization might judge their objectives by the following questions:

1. Are objectives stated in terms which identify the people or group concerned, the kind of behavior or behavior changes expected of the people involved, and the content or area of life in which this behavior is to operate?
2. Are objectives dynamic – likely to promote action on the part of the group?
3. Are objectives compatible with the general aims of the group or organization?
4. Are objectives achievable considering the level of maturity of the group or organization and permitted by the resources available to the group?
5. Are objectives developmental – will they lead the group to constantly higher levels of achievement?
6. Are objectives varied enough to meet the needs of individuals within the group?
7. Are objectives limited enough in number to avoid undue diffusion of effort within the organization?
8. Can objectives be evaluated – can evidence of actual progress be secured?
9. Were objectives cooperatively determined – was the group as a whole involved in the determination and acceptance of them?

The real purpose of a group is not to have certain persons perform activities. It may be to bring about changes in the group and its members, or, if it is an action group, to make group decisions and carry out specified action programs. An objective should identify changes to take place in the group or the kind of action expected of the group and its members.

An objective stated as a planned activity fails to indicate the kind of accomplishment expected. The real purposes of a group are not holding a bake sale or a dance. Instead, such activities are usually a means of accomplishing the group’s purposes or objectives. For example, a bake sale is a short-run activity which may raise funds for the intermediate goal of providing a scholarship. This is directed at the ultimate goal of improving the educational level of our citizens. Groups, if they are to be most efficient, must be careful to choose those short-run means-ends complexes (activities) which are not only consistent with, but also positively oriented toward, the intermediate and long range goals of the group.

Sometimes objectives are stated as general topics or content areas to be handled by the group. Statements of this kind do not specify what is expected of the group. Thus, in a group concerned with health, the objectives might be stated by listing such topics as sanitation, vaccination, or health insurance. A well-stated objective indicates the kind of changes desired in the group and its members, or the action sought. Behavioral changes can be made in group members by changing their knowledge, understandings, skills, interests, appreciations, and attitudes. Objectives of an action group should identify the kind of action expected and the specific end to be accomplished. A group objective is stated with sufficient clarity if a member can describe or illustrate the kind of behavior or action his group is expecting to accomplish.

Another way in which objectives are sometimes stated is in the form of generalized patterns of behavior. Such statements fail to indicate specifically the area of life or the activity to which the behavior is related. For example, one may find objectives that state: “To develop broad interests;” or “To develop desirable social attitudes.”

While these indicate the kind of change expected of the group members, it is doubtful if such highly generalized objectives could be very useful to a group. It is necessary to specify more definitely the content area to which this behavior applies, or the situation of the group and its members when such behavior is to be used.

The most useful form for stating objectives is to express them in terms which clearly identify: (1) the people, group, or groups concerned, (2) the kind of behavior or action to be accomplished, and (3) the content or problem area in which this behavior or action is to operate. For example, the following statements of objectives include all three of these elements. The first is an example of an educational objective, the second an action objective.

Objectives stated clearly enough to be useful to a group in planning its program and selecting its activities will need to indicate all three of these elements. When objectives are formulated on this three-dimensional basis they become a concise set of specifications to guide the further development of programs and plans. Once goals and objectives are clearly established, alternative techniques or means for accomplishing them can be explored and decided upon and a purposeful plan of action determined.

Groups sometimes adopt general, and often abstract, objectives and then proceed to consider them as immediately and easily achievable. Such objectives, especially for groups having relatively infrequent meetings, will usually not supply the needed direction nor allow for a degree of achievement necessary for group motivation, growth, and development. All groups need some short-run, specific objectives that are achievable. A feeling of wellbeing and satisfaction results from the achievement of any goal. Such objectives help groups to proceed with purpose and in an organized manner; they help insure accomplishment, and permit the identification of evidence for the evaluation of achievement.

Levels of Objectives

It is also helpful to think of objectives on various levels.

Objectives of learning activities in education have been classified into levels and are marked by grade promotion and graduation. In considering objectives for groups and group members, it is helpful to make a similar classification.

Objectives based on the needs and interests of group members as individuals are usually very specific. Examples might include learning to speak more effectively, or increasing understanding of a teen-age son or daughter.

Other objectives may be based on the needs and interests of a group or organization. These are group rather than individually oriented and require the efforts of people working together. Some examples might be to develop favorable public relations with other local service clubs, to secure a new minister, to double the membership of the community club.

Objectives based on the needs and interests of the community, county, state, or nation are dependent upon the joint efforts of several groups and organizations. Their objectives might include inaugurating a housing development program for low-income families, bringing about rural and urban understanding of the zoning problems of a growing city, or county school reorganization.

General and remote objectives – the all-inclusive aims of society – are so broad they could serve as an umbrella for most groups and organizations. They might include “strengthening democracy,” and insuring the good life for all people.

The needs of individuals and of society must be joined in such a way that both can be met reasonably well. In any group, the relative importance and relationship of the individual member and his objectives and the group and its objectives need to be recognized and understood. One way to visualize this relationship is to consider two circles partially overlapping (Fig. 8.1). One of these can represent the objectives and goals of the individual member of a group < Circle I). The other circle can represent the objectives and goals of the group (Circle G). If these circles overlap, then an individual’s objectives and the group’s objectives are partially the same (Area C) and partially not the same.

The circle representing the goals and objectives of the individual is larger than that representing the group because it is recognized that the interests of an individual member are varied and only a part of them can be met by membership in a single group. Most groups are organized around a relatively few specific interests common to all members.

Individual and group goals and objectives overlap considerably for some members (Case B) and very little for certain members in some groups (Case A). If the overlapping is relatively large, as in B, there should be strong individual member motivation. If this situation exists the groups’ chances for goal accomplishment will be improved providing there is appropriate choice of means. This same concept of overlap of group and community goals and objectives is appropriate in any consideration of goals and objectives that are more inclusive than just for anyone specific group.

In the actual operation of groups, objectives are a rather complex interwoven network. Sometimes all levels are involved. At times, objectives seem hidden – even lost. Every group periodically needs to review and re-identify its objectives and classify them into their appropriate levels. All objectives must be consistent and compatible at any level just as immediate or short-run goals must be consistent and compatible with intermediate and more ultimate objectives.

Every individual desires security, recognition, response, and new experience. The relative emphasis he places on these desires is based upon his own experiences which are reflected in his personal value system. The time and energy he gives to any group is relative to his personal evaluation of how much that group satisfies these desires in comparison with other groups of which he is a part or other things which he might do with his time. This is not to imply that this is a calculated rational process for all individuals or that any individual goes through this rational process in all instances.

Time is usually a scarce resource. The degree to which an individual participates in any group depends upon the alternative uses he has for his time. Usually one participates in groups offering the greatest opportunity to maximize the satisfaction of one’s basic desires. Desired satisfactions are based upon a personal value system. Thus, the affiliation patterns of group members affect the degree of identity, involvement, and participation in any specific group.

As a result of group participation, individuals become identified in the over-all status pattern of the community. It is a two-way process. Middle-class people tend to associate in middle-class groups; people who associate in middle-class groups become identified as middle-class people; and groups become identified as middle-class because most of their members are middle-class – and so the process evolves.

Groups are usually not completely class bound. They tend to contain a small proportion of members from the class immediately beneath them – often leaders in that class. One way in which an individual moves up the class system is by gaining acceptance in groups which are identified with a class above him. A group may contain members from the social level immediately above its class identity. The research evidence is that few groups include members from more than three strata in their communities.

A group must have social justification in terms of the over-all values of the community if it is to continue to exist and have status. It must have certain goals and objectives related to community goals and objectives. In many cases groups participate in certain kinds of activities to secure this type of social justification from the community. In this sense an external force has affected their group functioning.

Understanding External Forces

Group members wishing to understand the external forces affecting their groups in the total community picture should ask themselves the following questions:

1. How well does this group conform to the community value system, i.e. :
   1. Are its goals and objectives consistent with community goals and objectives?
   2. Do its methods of operation conform to community norms?
   3. How important to the group is this conformity?
2. Does the group have extra-community organizational connections? If so, what is the nature of the extra-community organizational value system? Is it consistent with the community value system and expectations?
3. What are the other associations of the group members?
4. How do the members look upon this group:
   1. How do they define its goals, objectives, and limitations?
   2. How important is the group to them in relation to the other groups of which they are a part?
5. What is the group’s status in the community in relation to the other existing groups?
6. What does the community expect of the group:
   1. In terms of goals, objectives, accomplishments, areas of responsibility and activity?
   2. In terms of how the group goes about its tasks?

Answers to these questions should give some insights into the external dynamics that may be affecting group functioning. Also, one can reasonably estimate the community response to any specific action which the group might wish to take.

Every group has a status in the community, whose members rank it in relationship to coexisting groups. Where and how a group is ranked depends to a degree upon how consistent its goals, objectives, and means are with the general community values. Related to its status is its role – or what the community expects it to do. At any given time two or more groups may be competing for a given status position. Any or all of these forces may affect the goals the group sets, and how it attempts and how hard it will work to accomplish them.

Parent Organizations

Many local groups have affiliations with an organizational structure which exists outside the community. The Masonic Lodge, the American Legion, the American Red Cross, many church denominations, and Federated Women’s Clubs are examples of this type. Most affiliated community groups have a high degree of local autonomy. But there are many instances where the “over-all organization” does exert influence through counsel, guidance, required or recommended programs and policies, and program aids provided to the local affiliate. It is important to recognize that such external forces affecting group function exist and must be considered in understanding group functioning.

Sometimes groups have problems in this regard because they are affiliated with outside organizations which do not hold the same values as the community. For example, the parent organization may set down certain policy positions on a national level. In some communities these policies may not be completely acceptable. The local unit is faced with the task of adjusting to this difference in values.

Groups, like individuals, can make different adjustments when faced with this kind of a dilemma: they can ignore the community values, which means they risk losing status or being ostracized by the community; they can ignore the institutional values, which means they risk censure by the parent institution; or they can try to adjust between the two. The fact that they are an integral part of an extra-community pattern as well as an integral part of the community is a force which constantly influences their activities and behavior. To understand such groups, one must recognize the value orientation of both the community and the parent institutions.

Groups with affiliation outside the community must often walk a tight-wire between individual group member interests, community values, and the values of the “over-all organization.” In many cases these are not completely compatible.

Another type of group is found in nearly every community. It is a subdivision of an existing formal structure. A good example is the “ladies aid society” – an integral part of most churches. The goals and objectives of these groups, and their means of attaining them, must be consistent with those of the parent group.

Most communities have groups that are independent of any formal group structure existing beyond the community. This independent group usually reflects community values and the social level of most of its members. Though independent, the community has expectations of the group, assigns it status, and has some influence on it. Such forces will affect its ongoing activities and must be considered in understanding its functioning.

Communities are made up of people interacting as individuals and within groups to carry out the activities considered necessary to satisfy their needs. The community develops expectations of various groups, though these expectancies may vary widely from group to group. Certain groups, with certain kinds of members, are expected to perform specific functions for specific categories of people. The freedom with which any group in a community carries on its activities and functions is related to the total community definition of the function and role of that group.

The expectations of a given group may be based upon such things as tradition, past performance, the social status of the membership and leadership, the group’s publicly stated purposes, and the public image of the organization and its organizational affiliation. These forces become effective as they are reflected by individual members or by the members communicating and interacting with each other and making decisions.

However, forces may originate from individuals who are not members of the group, from other groups in the community, or from institutions within the community, such as church, school, or business. Or they may come from other groups with which the local groups are affiliated – such as local Red Cross affiliation with National Red Cross organization. Also forces arise from the more abstract American value system, related to the expectancies of various kinds of groups and group activities.

These external forces may be judged “restrictive” by the group. They may feel certain desired goals and means cannot be adopted by them. On the other hand, the group may judge these external forces as “expansive” in the sense that the group feels the pressure to accept some new and perhaps broader concept of its goals and means. In either case, external forces will affect group functioning.

The main point to be made in relation to this force is that systematic, rational evaluation has great potential in leading group members and the group to greater productivity. Members participate the most in group activities when they understand the goals and objectives of the group and evaluate the group as making satisfactory progress toward these goals. The more satisfied members are with the progress of the group toward its goals, the more they participate. Those who evaluate the group and its progress and are satisfied with that progress, identify better with the group.

Leaders who make greater use of the various procedures for evaluating their work and the work of the group are more often rated as the most effective. It is even more important in terms of group productivity and morale to know exactly how well the group or individual is doing even when the evaluation is not high. It seems more important to know where you are in terms of progress than to have a hazy idea of where you might be.

It would seem highly desirable for groups to set up some formal mechanism that enables them to evaluate periodically group process as well as group progress. This enables the group to direct its energies to the specific task at hand, not go off on tangents; to make rational decisions about changes in group goals or process. It affords the possibility of lasting member satisfactions. Specific techniques will be suggested later.

What About Your Group?

1. Does the group take time to adequately evaluate progress toward action or content goals?
2. Does the group adequately evaluate group process?
3. Are many group members involved in the evaluation process?
4. Is the group objective about its functioning?
5. Does the group make rational decisions regarding its functioning and does it implement changes suggested?
6. Does the group evaluate accomplishments as well as disappointments?
7. Is evaluation periodic, or is it continuous?
8. Are the results of evaluation available to all members?

Every group has an actual or a potential dynamic state from which will arise the processes and the productivity of the group. Many of the forces which go to establish this dynamism do provide a further step in the development of information which may be applied to all groups – both to encourage their progress and to further their ends.