1

INTRODUCTION TO SOCIAL WORK WITH GROUPS BLOCK II Group Development Stages of Group Development Group Dynamics Group Structure and Size Group Functions Group Norms Roles Status Cohesiveness Interaction Leadership Power Conformity Group Decision Making Group Conflict

Group development refers to the process of progress groups achieve over a period of time. Two specific indicators are: (a) the members feeling settled and happy in the group, and (b) progress the group is in achieving its objectives. Regular meetings of the group, a interaction among the members, a free flowing conversation, general spirit of cooperation and accommodation, are signs of positive environment in a group, reflecting a clear sign of group development A growing activity schedule, increase in savings, treating an asset such as a water source, a cooperative business enterprise, achieving a change in the members coping mechanism, and mental health status, are all signs of

2
group development as well. On the other hand, growing conflicts and tensions, decline in membership, decline in number of meetings held, declining schedule of activity, and boredom and stagnation among members, are signs of lack of group development.

Group Development A stage of development or growth in a group is defined here as a specific level of achievement in task accomplishment and emotional integration of members in a group. The stages of group development helps the worker to monitor what is happening in a group. There is no unanimity among authors in conceptualizing stages of development. The area of research on group development is known as temporal environments of small group. Most studies in the area focus on therapy, training, or self-analytic groups. Most theorists argue that group development is a recapitulation of the childhood experiences of individual group members. Other factors that might affect group development, such as: (a) the beliefs and expectations that current members share about their group (Long 1984); (b) the entry of new members or the departure of old ones (Morcland Levine, 1988); and (c) changes in the group's physical or social environment (Gersick, 1988), are rarely acknowledged. It is important to remember, however, that every group operates at some developmental level and that its level of development is bound to change. Several studies show that the effectiveness of a leader's style depends on the developmental level.

It is obvious that like individuals, groups of individuals too would not remain the same over any period of rime. Yet, by the term 'group development' what is referred to is not how the individuals in a group are changing but how the relationships in a group are changing. They either improve or they deteriorate. People may start looking at each other as friends or as enemies. It is also possible that certain relationships may get more

3
stabilized and as a result the development of the group may altogether stop or remain stagnant for long periods. But experience tells us that the intensity of both positive and negative relationships continue to change. The scope of relationships also continually increases or decreases. Hence, generally relationships change rather than remain totally stagnant. Generally, the well-known models of group development identify a linear arrangement of development stages, where one stage is expected to precede or follow the other stage, such as the forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning, provided by Tuckman (1963). But now some models of group development do depict a cyclical arrangement of stages, whereby conceding the possibility of development stages to be seen more as an ongoing process rather than the neat arrangement of one following the other, for a variety of reasons. Theory of cyclical stages talks about repetition of stages throughout the lifecycle of a group. The relationships among members and with worker are the main locus in group development. As Konopka (1963) noted, the relationship of the members to each other are rather complex and full of meaning and possibilities. They are never static. They change in time and in relation to specific situations and events in the life span of a group. There are some groups which settle down very quickly and are able to achieve their goals without much disruptions. Other groups might take a long time in resolving their differences, and never settle down.

Bales (1950) was perhaps the first person to study and describe the stages of group development. In his studies of groups he noted that the first thing that people in a group do is to familiarize themselves with other people in the group and explore the possibilities that the group has to offer to them. He called it orientation stage. Bales went on to suggest that next thing members do is to analyse the information gathered and reach some conclusions about what kind of members are there, whether they are trustworthy, helpful and cooperative and how - they look at the other members, what the

4
group therefore can offer to the members, its activities and programmes and so on. The members may review their relationship with others in general and form their conclusions based on their experiences so far. He termed this stage as evaluation stage. The analysis or the evaluation of members about the people, programmes and benefits would then lead to a decision about their participation and action in the group. The group would also reach the stage of relationship among members where they can take collective decisions about matters in the group. Bales termed it as the stage of decisionmaking. Northen (1969), in her description of group development, seems to follow Bales, though she termed the middle phase as exploring and testing which leads to a stage which she terms as problem-solving and finally termination. The focus of group development is on relationships in the group. The use of the term problem-solving in the context of relationship is confusing. Northen, in her later work in collaboration with Rosella Kurland (2001), suggested that "following the initial stage, there is a period of exploration of relationships and uncertainty about power". The process of evaluation as suggested by Bales and resistance and negotiation as suggested by Klein (1972), appears to be a good description of the next stage after the initial stage of orientation. Klien's description is confirmed by Tuckman's use of the term storming to refer to the process of exploration and negotiation in a group. Northen and Kurland go on to suggest that, "as uncertainty is resolved" and members come to terms with their relationship with each other and the worker, they are able to work together and thus enter the next stage of group development. The worker at this stage would do well to focus on the emotional issues arising out of the relationships. Garland. Jones and Kolondy (1976) term the second stage power and control and suggest that the main task of worker is to deal with matters arising out of settling the power issues in the group. If these issues are not adequately dealt with, it can lead to hostility towards each other in the group as also towards the worker. Power issues are however never adequately settled. The

5
negotiations reached at a time can change with the passage of time and also as the group confronts new situations both internally and externally. The experiences suggest that a policy of role allocations based on merit and role equalization, whereby all contributions by members are given due recognition, certainly helps. With every member developing a sense of self-respect and partnership in group, power issues are likely to settle down well. Group Development Models Bales (1950) Orientation Evaluation Tuckman (1963) Forming Storming Klein (1972) Orientation Resistance Trekker (1972) Beginning Emergence of DecisionMaking Performing Intimacy Norming Negotiation Garland, Jones Northen and and Kolodny Kurtand (2007) Inclusion-

(1976) Pre affiliation Power

Orientation and Uncertaintyexploration

Group Control

Feeling Development Intimacy of Bond Strong Group Differentiation Mutuality and Goal

Adjourning

Termination

Decline Group Feeling

in Separation

Achievement SeparationTermination

Ending Stages of Group Development

6
Many groups are formed 1o accomplish some task. This requires that the members work together somewhat as a team. Groups coming together to design a military action, plan a golf tournament, or decide on annual fund-raising activities for the local school ParentTeacher Association (PTA) all go through some group-formation process. Researchers have identified over 100 various models of group development.

Following on the work of Bruce Tuckman (1965), perhaps the best-known model depicts four stages of group development that are often termed forming, storming, norming, and performing. As groups come together and try to accomplish goals as a team, they evolve through each of these four stages. They come together, work out differences, get to work on the task at hand, and then get the task done. Some models of team development also add a fifth stage, called adjourning or mourning, during which the group disbands. These stages of team building apply to all types of groups.

When individuals are first together as a group, they enter the forming (or orientation) stage. They learn about the other members, explore the group goal, and share their backgrounds and expertise. As issues become contentious, the group moves into the storming (or conflict (stage. Members may express dissatisfaction, criticism, hostility, or even drop out of the group. Most groups do experience conflict at some point. Although it may at first appear destructive, this storming stage can actually be constructive if differences are presented and resolved openly. When members start to resolve their issues and work together, they are norming (or building cohesion). They begin to form a cohesive unit, establish rules and roles to get their job done, and start to think of the group as "we." Then the group performs by "getting down to business" and working toward their goals. There may also be a dissolution stage, in which the group wraps up their tasks and terminates their roles. This stage can be planned, such as when the

7
group accomplishes its goal (e.g., completing a fund-raising event), or spontaneous (e.g., a budget cut ends a project before its completion).

Forming : The initial formation of the group and bringing together of a number of individuals who identify., tentatively, the purpose of the group, its composition and terms of reference. At this stage consideration is given to hierarchical structure of the group, pattern of leadership, individuals roles and responsibilities, and codes of conduct. There is likely to be considerable anxiety as members attempt to create and impression, to test each other, and to establish their personal identify within the group.

Storming: At this stage, the group encounters conflict as members confront and criticize each other and the approach the group is taking to their task. Issues that arise include identification of roles and responsibilities, operational rules and procedures, and the individual need for recognition of his or her skills and abilities. This stage is also referred to as the counterdependent stage where members tend to "flex their muscles" in search of identity. In some cases, the group may have problems getting through this stage. This may occur if the group encounters difficulty clarifying their task, agreeing on their mission or mandate, or deciding how they will proceed. Lack of skills, ability or aptitude can also contribute to their mability to get beyond this stage.

Norming : As conflict and hostility start to be controlled members of the group will establish guidelines and standards, and develop their own norms of acceptable behaviour. The norming stage is important in establishing the need for members to cooperate in order to plan, agree standards of performance and fulfill the purpose of the group. This co-operation and adherence to group norms can work against effective organizational performance. It may be remembered, for example, that, in the bank wiring

8
room experiment of the Hawthorne studies, group norms imposed a restriction on the level of output of the workers.

Performing: When the group has sorted out its social structure and understands its goals and individual roles, it will move toward accomplishing its task. Mutual assistance and creativity become prominent themes at this stage. The group, sensing its growth and maturity, becomes independent, relying on its own resources.

Adjourning : This is last stage of the group development process. At this stage wrapping up becomes the priority instead of high performance. At this stage some members feel upbeat due to task accomplishment and some feel depressed because this is the time members disband and friendship developed during the group work will have to part. But this stage occurs only in the life of temporary groups. For permanent groups performing is the last stage of development.

Group Dynamics

The social process by which people interact and behave in a group environment is called group dynamics. Group dynamics involves the influence of personality, power, and behaviour on the group process. Is the relationship between individuals conducive to achieving the groups goals? Is the structure and size of the group an asset in pursuing both the task and maintenance functions of the group? How is formal and informal power used to build consensus or reach decisions? Does the combination of individuals produce the right culture? How these individuals, cultures, and internal forces interact allows us to analyze and better understand group effectiveness.

9
There are two types of groups: 1) formal groups who are structured to pursue a specific task, and 2) informal groups who emerge naturally in response to organizational or member interests. These interests may include anything from a research group charged with the responsibility to develop a new product to a group of workers who spontaneously come together to improve social or member activities. While we can learn a lot from informal groups in terms of leadership and motivation, we will concentrate mostly on formal groups, characterized by member appointment and delegated authority and responsibility

Group Structure and Size

Effective group performance depends to a large extent, on the size and composition of the group. A group may consist of as few as two people (giving credibility to the statement mat "two heads are better man one"), or as many as three or four hundred. In order to be effective, group size should be kept to a minimum without jeopardizing workload and goal achievement. Larger groups increase the possibility of conflict due to the variety of viewpoints, few opportunities for the development of social relationships, a decrease in participation levels, and lack of opportunity for individual recognition.

Individual skills and performance must be a consideration in forming a group. How many people will be required to ensure mat all the skill sets necessary for the performance of the task are included? Will the task be slowed by a poor performer as may happen with assembly line production? Does the group contain the combination of leaders and followers mat will lessen the potential for member rivalries and conflicts?

10
Diversification is a factor in both group development and skill requirement. A group of predominately white males may develop more quickly man an ethnically and racially diverse group of men and women. But while the former group may be better able to communicate, set standards and grow as a cohesive unit, it may not be diverse enough to meet all the community or organizational needs. A more diverse group may take longer to reach peak performance due to the number of cultures, language differences, and interpretation of the task to be completed, but once they do develop, diverse groups are equally productive and may even be more creative in problem-solving because members have access to a broader base of ideas for solutions.

Group Functions

Three functions that influence the effectiveness and productivity of groups are task functions, maintenance functions, and self-interest functions.

Task Functions This is the primary reason for the establishment of a group. To achieve the task, they must have members that fulfill some or all of the following roles: a) Initiating: by proposing tasks or goals, defining problems and suggesting procedures for a solution; b)Information seeking: by requesting facts, seeking relevant information, and asking for suggestions or ideas: c) Information giving: by offering facts, providing information, stating beliefs, and giving suggestions or ideas: d) Clarifying ideas: by interpreting and clarifying input, indicating alternatives and giving examples:

11
e) Bringing closure: by summarizing, restating, and offering solutions: f) Consensus testing: by checking for agreements and sending up "trial balloons

Maintenance Behaviour Each group needs social-emotional support to be effective. Some members of the group will take the lead in providing this support which consists of the following: a) Encouraging: by showing regard for other members and providing positive response to their contributions; b) Improving group atmosphere: by expressing group feelings, sensing moods and relationships and sharing feelings; c) Harmonizing: by reconciling differences and reducing group tension; d) Compromising: by admitting errors and looking for alternatives; e) Gate-keeping: by attemptmg to keep communications flowing- facilitating the participation of others, and suggesting procedures for sharing discussion; f) Standard setting. by reminding members of group norms, rules, and roles.

Self-interest Behaviour This third function displayed by some individuals, members generally takes away from group performance and affects task achievement at the expense of the group. Activities that identify self-interest behaviour are as follows:

a) Dominating and controlling: by displaying lack of respect for others, cutting them off, nor listening, and restating other members' suggestions with a different meaning: b) Blocking: by stifling a line of thought, and changing the topic either away from the point of view or back to his or her own interest;

12
c) Manipulating: by providing self-serving information, or a single point of view designed to achieve a decision that is consistent with their position; d) Belittling: through put-downs, sneering at other's point of view, or making jokes about another member's contribution; e) Splitting hairs: by nit-picking, searching for insignificant details that delay a solution, or undermining another person's point of view.

Group Norms

In the early stages of group development, a substantial amount of tune is spent on setting social standards and acceptable group behaviour. These standards are referred to as group norms and can be both formal and informal. Norms are not individual behaviours, but are collectively held expectations of how a group will function. For example, a new member who joins a group may initially search for clues about what type of behaviour is acceptable. What are the dress codes? How do I address my supervisors? What is proper etiquette? What topics or discussions are acceptable or avoided?

Recognition of these norms is important, since they provide regularity and predictability to individual and group behaviour. Bosses are more likely to insist on norms regarding work performance or attendance, whereas other norms might address the acceptability of rearranging personal space or assisting co-workers. Group norms may include loyalty norms such as the belief that managers have to work on weekends and holidays or accept transfers to prove then loyalty to the company. Dress norms may include anything from uniforms to shirt and ties to bikinis, depending on the establishment or business. Reward norms includes perks or benefits that come as a result of individual or

13
group performance. Criteria may include productivity levels, loyalty, equality (everyone gets the same reward), or social responsibility (those who need it most).

Roles There are two kinds of roles present in groups. The first is assigned roles. These include titles such as chairperson, secretary, manager, treasurer, etc. The second kind is emergent roles and arise as a result of group social or emotional needs. They include confidant, group clown, gossip, mentor, or scapegoat. Two factors that impact the effectiveness of organizational roles are role ambiguity and role conflict. Role ambiguity occurs when a person is unclear of what is expected of him or her, instructions about performance are not clear, tasks are assigned without context or if a supervisors actions and instructions send contradictory messages. Role Conflict occurs when a group member feels his or her job overlaps with others, or if the job description is unclear.

Status Most organizations have ways of giving status or rank to members depending on any number of factors. In many cases, these status symbols reinforce the authority, hierarchy and reward system within the group. Obvious examples include the move from a cubicle to an inner office to a window office, and finally, to a comer office, and as an individual moves through this progression, authority, decision-making, and prestige also increases. These symbols are meant to increase motivation (Maslow's esteem needs), as a reward for loyal and productive service, and as an acknowledgment of the level of decision-making accorded the individual.

Cohesiveness

14
One of the primary factors in group performance involves group cohesion. The ultimate role of groups is to come together as a unit and perform with professionalism and dedication. A group that can work as a unit, share tasks and recognize the contributions of its members will meet with more success than a group mired in conflict, role ambiguity, and lack of motivation. Group cohesion makes it attractive for members to belong, attracts high performers, and provides opportunities for individual recognition within a group setting. Cohesion may result from internal successes, high socialemotional support, or external threats.

Group size can also affect cohesion. A group that is too large may find that members cannot get the recognition they are looking for. Tins can lead to the formation of subgroups or cliques winch further causes members to withdraw or withhold input It is an act of protest because he or she may feel that their achievement is being used to raise the credibility of the whole group, or

Interaction

People join groups for a variety of purposes. These may be to accomplish tasks that cannot be carried our individually since a group would be more cost efficient to meet socio-emotional needs etc. Interaction in a group is a natural phenomenon. The interaction begins as people come face to face in a situation. The interaction process is fluid and undergoes frequent changes that may lead to either conflict or cohesion in a group. Communication, both verbal and non verbal, facilitates interaction. In working with group, a central concern is to learn about the patterns of interactions, how widespread they are, are they making the group or breaking the group. Interaction focused around a central goal makes a good beginning, and indicates that the group is in the process of

15
evolving. On the other hand, when several themes are being discussed among two or three people, the interaction is diffused. This is indicative of lack of focus and order in the group In Indian conditions, this is a normal occurrence. The focus is achieved through the initiative of either the worker or leader or both. The factors influencing interaction are: The nature of relationship among group members The degree of homogeneity among group members The nature of group goals The nature of leadership The size of the group

The general sociological understanding is that larger the size of a group, lesser is the interaction among its members. Interactions in smailer groups tend to be easier and more intimate. Social work groups formed for a variety of reasons are kept small to monitor the interactions more closely. In larger groups the presence of a large number of people and the greater diversity among members put a strain on interactions. The largeness of the group in away increases both the physical and psychological space among members thus influencing the interactions.

The relationships among members or the 'emotional bond between them is an important influence on the interactions in a group. The relationships influence the communication and interaction of members and vice versa. Relationships get distorted in absence of proper communication. Similarly, a negative relationship between members can distort the communication. Positive relationships lead to an increase in interaction among members, whereas negative relationships tend to restrict communication and interaction. Negative relations in a group will dilute the focus of the group. The members' energy will

16
be wasted on winning individual battles. Social status of members influences, the interaction pattern in a group. These trends are often visible in a panchayat (local body) meeting, and also in any discussion in a group in the community. The women and Dalit members interact according to their social status, as also the common peasant, while the elite dominate. Age hierarchies are also observed in group interactions in rural areas. Social or formal status of members influence interactions in formal groups too.

The nature of group and its purpose - growth orientation, task orientation or treatment influences the interaction. Task orientation dilutes the focus on emotional content of the group and makes interaction more routine and structured. In task oriented groups the agenda has specific issues and the group functions within a prescribed time frame to resolve all the issues. In treatment and growth orientation more openness in interaction is encouraged. The focus is on monitoring the emotional aspects of the interaction among members. The group has to allow sufficient time for members to unburden their personal problems. Interaction in formal groups is different from interaction in informal groups, because in formal groups the power is formally located and the role structure and hierarchy is also formally determined, providing a definite direction to interactions in the group. Leadership is perhaps the key variable in understanding interaction. A democratic leader in a formal group laying emphasis on emotional content can make interactions as informal as in an informal group without losing focus on the task or goals. At the same time, an autocratic leader may dominate the interactions in all types of groups, whether formal or informal, large or small.

The isolate or low key participation is indicative of an interaction pattern, where some members are keeping a low profile, remaining at the periphery of the affairs of the group. People may adopt this pattern of interaction for different reasons. A common

17
interpretation is, lack of interest, and/or lack of adequate skills to interact, but the reasons could be varied. People may remain silent during a group session since they feel the others will not be able to understand their intervention, which is a case of extreme differences. At other times they remain a spectator because they are unsure about the intentions and commitment of others, indicating poor bonding.

The sub-group is another interaction pattern inevitable in some groups, where people are likely to find interpersonal attraction more striking in a small number of people within the group. Gender bonding, regional, religious and caste affiliations, and interest bonding, commonly induce sub-group bonding. The patterns of interactions can be like the following figures:

Some of the possible ways of improving interactions in groups can be: Controlling the size Reducing social distance Developing effective leadership

18
Clarifying group goals Creating and maintaining trust Explaining interaction patterns in the group Dealing with fears and resistances Making internal feelings explicit

Leadership Sociologists recognize the important distinction in groups that not all members have equal influence. Some members emerge as leaders, those who are able to influence others toward some future direction, event, goal, or purpose. However, all leaders do not lead in the same way or focus on the same goals. Some leaders take an instrumental approach, focusing on getting specific jobs done, while others take an expressive approach, concerning themselves with the emotional well-being of the group (Bales and Strodtbeck 1951). Groups actually have a need for both types of approaches. In meetings, for example, groups have to accomplish whatever task is at hand (e.g., deciding on next year's marketing strategies) and also negotiate relationships between group members (e.g., people who may disagree or dislike each other have to remain civil enough with those others to make a decision).

Leaders also differ in regard to how they motivate others and what they seek to achieve. Transactions! lenders are task-oriented and focus on getting group members to achieve goals (Jung and Avolio 1999). These type of leaders reward accomplishing routine goals but do not especially inspire performance beyond the routine. In other words, their group members accomplish their tasks but generally do not make extra efforts beyond those required. In an accounting department, for example, the billers would get the monthly

19
invoices out as required but not do more (e.g., meet to develop ways to improve the invoicing process).

Another type of leader is transformational. These leaders encourage others to go beyond the routine by building a different type of organization that focuses on future possibilities (Kanter 1983). Transformational leaders use enthusiasm and optimism to inspire others. They encourage innovation and creativity. They exhibit characteristics that others can identify with, trust, and follow. Transformational leaders also focus on mentoring others as leaders (Hellriegel, Slocum, and Woodman 2001, 362-68). In an accounting department headed by a transformational leader, the staff might regularly meet to discuss more efficient ways to work or how to improve customer satisfaction, or devote time to testing new software that would help the department improve its efficiency.

Power Leaders have differential levels of power, the ability to influence others, even if those others resist (Weber 1947). Greater power also allows a person or group to better resist when others try to control them. Power is a relative term. It is measured in relation to another person or group. French and Raven ) 1959) have shown that power can be rooted on one or more of five bases. First, when someone or some group controls the distribution of valued rewards or negative reinforcements, they hold reward power. A manager who has the ability to give pay raises holds reward power. Second, when someone or some group can punish others for noncompliance with their wishes, they hold coercive power. A school principal exercises coercive power when ex-pelling a student for rule breaking. Third, those with whom someone wishes to identify or be like (in other words, their reference group), hold

20
referent power. An example of referent power is a rock star whose dress, demeanor, and singing style is copied by an aspiring young singer. Fourth, those who have, or are perceived as having, some special expeitise hold expert power An engineer who has overseen the building of several bridges has expert power over a team of inexperienced junior engineers working on a similar project. Fifth, when someone or some group is recognized as having a valid claim to require compliance to their wishes, they hold legitimate power This may also be referred to as authority: A police office holds legitimate power or authority.

Conformity Sociologists and their colleagues in fields such as social psychology have demonstrated that groups can shape members' behavior in powerful ways. Groups may require members to conform, sharing certain norms, values, behaviors, and sometimes even opinions. Peer pressure to smoke (or not) or to dress a certain way to "fit in" are examples of this process. Enforcing conformity is the means through which groups survive.

Some classic experiments illustrate the power groups have in producing conformity. Solomon Asch (1952, 1955) was able to demonstrate that groups have such a strong influence on their members that individuals can be influenced to agree with group perceptions even when it is obvious that the other members are wrong. Asch's results showed that, on average, over one-third of all the research subjects who were not collaborators conformed to the group opinion, giving the same incorrect responses as the rest of the group. He explains the results of his experiment: "Among the extremely yielding persons we found a group who quickly reached the conclusion: 'I am wrong, they are right.' Others yielded in order 'not to spoil your results.' Many of the individuals

21
who went along suspected that the majority were 'sheep' following the first responder, or that the majority were victims of an optical illusion; nevertheless, these suspicions failed to free them at the moment of decision" (Asch 1955,33).

Group Decision Making Irving Janis (1983, 1989, 1991) has shown that pressure to conform is also at work in group decision-making situations. By studying a number of military events and policymaking groups, Janis identified a phenomenon he calls groupthink. In groupthink, group members faced with making a decision focus so much on gelling along, being seen as a "good " group member, and agreeing that they may not adequately evaluate the option they are considering. As one idea becomes the focus of group consensus, other ideas may be eliminated without careful consideration. Anyone who supports something other than the group consensus may be seen as a foe. This is especially a problem in groups with members who are close-knit, like and respect each other, and want to stay in good standing with other group members. Since group members do not want to start an argument or be seen as an outsider, they do not readily voice objections or criticize each other's ideas.

Group Conflict When human beings come together to work, play or carry out any other activity, conflict is inevitable. To quote Rousseau, a man becomes wicked in the company of fellow human beings. Differences among members in a group will occur in resolution of issues such as to select the group goals, to have control over resources, to decide strategies to pursue the goals, to create a group structure and in distribution of power. In a self-help group of women, the concept of empowerment, financial contributions, loan disbursement and selection of office bearers are all issues likely to generate differences.

22
Group conflict may present a wide variety, such as between individual members, between member/s and group, between a member and the leader/worker, between members and leader/worker and between sub groups. The reasons for conflict may differ, depending on the context. The nature of conflict in a treatment group, for example, will be different from that in a task group. Many authors agree that conflict will generally start in the middle, working or performing stage (see Toseland and Rivas, 2001). In a treatment group, conflict is generally between members. The reasons may be miscommunication, which results in lack of trust and defensive behaviour. Inadequacy to deal with diversity is a common cause of conflict in all kinds of groups.

Similarly, exclusionary practices are a potential source of conflict in groups beside ego clashes. Heated exchanges, silence, negative feedback, personal remarks directed against individuals, attacking the integrity of individuals, are all symptoms indicative of conflict in a group.

Some potential sources of group conflict can be summarized as follows: Miscommunication Ideological differences Rigidity of group structure Cultural differences Inability to accept diversity Location of power Leadership styles Group goals not addressing individual needs of a sizeable section of group Plurality of options Outside environment Lack of clear group norms

23
Paucity of resources Greater heterogeneity among members

The capacity to deal with a conflict varies among members and the inability to deal with conflict effectively produces stress. It is normal for people therefore to avoid conflict. A confrontation means to lake a stand on any issue, or more simply, to express your views even though they are different from that of the majority or the leader. The result is pressure to conform. The stress is higher for the person taking a stand in a group in absence of support from others. Things become complicated when the majority is on the other side or become neutral. In groups with power of reward and punishment the stress is higher than in other situations. There is a difference between a hostile confrontation and a caring confrontation. A caring confrontation is to help members make an honest assessment of themselves or to speak more about their own reactions rather than talking about others (Corey and Corey, 2006). A negative confrontation is designed to hurt others. Often people are not sure why they are doing what they are doing. It is obvious that confrontations in groups have the potential to affect the development of the group and the individual members.