I am surprised at the frequency of counterproductive group dynamics within working groups of educators. In addition to my own experiences in PD workshops and school committees, I continue to hear similar anecdotes from other educators year after year. These experiences most often include the behavior types: "power-hungry leader," "overly assertive talker," and "complainer."
The power-hungry leader delegates like a lord and issues commands like a general, when in fact there is no "real power" to be had....the sphere of influence is usually relatively small.
The overly assertive talker is just plain rude...also known as "know-it-all," this type suppresses the opinions of others and often filibusters about nothing.
The complainer promotes negativity and assumes the role of victim/martyr regarding the difficulty of implementing the topics of discussion.
Given the long-standing practice of establishing group norms and roles, along with the fact that educators expect more refined behavior from their own students, I wonder why teacher groups permit such behavior.
Do any of you experience this phenomenon beyond the isolated incident?
RK
I have experienced such a phaenomenon too many times. In my opinion those behaviours are not avoidable, but they are essential to the group structure and dynamics. Nevertheless I believe that it is important to be aware of the arising of these characters to seize their potential in order to make the group more effective concerning the purposes targeted.
Hi Randall
If an organisation prior doing PD go for need assessment and after PD conduct feedback then they can change this scene.
thanks and regards
Hi Randall,
I've also seen this stuff over and over, both in professional live and in academia. There is that old joke that academics argue more because the stakes are so low. Of course, the stakes are in fact very high if you are serious about education, and the "noise" in the meetings (and other political shenanegans) really get in the way. These are in fact dysfunctional ways of establishing personal power or status. I have two suggestions. One is to get people to write their topics on the white (or black) board and allocate a percentage of time to each (like a seminar). The other, related suggestion is to run such meetings like a SCRUM - if the issues are actionable and goals are clear. The only other thing that works, I think, is to model good citizenship yourself and see if people start imitating it. You have my sympathy!
Brenda
I appreciate your perspectives on this phenomenon.
Thanks to Germán for contributing the idea of quality control within the workgroup, and also to Neelima for suggesting quality control at the PD planning level. I believe both ideas would be helpful in avoiding and "cleaning up" counterproductive behavior in committees and working groups. Brenda supplied my favorite quote: "These are in fact dysfunctional ways of establishing personal power or status." That statement opens up my thinking to other ways to be more productive and less frustrated in such situations. (Also, this concept of scrum is completely new to me! I may take it for a test drive with my high school students....)
Best wishes,
Randall
If you read French, you will find very helpful, precise and practical tools for self-assessment and improvement of team-work dynamics (among profs or students) in this short handbook:
Motoi, (I.) et Villeneuve, L. (2009). Guide de résolution de conflits dans le travail en équipe. Presses de l'Université du Québec. 88 p.
http://www.puq.ca/catalogue/livres/guide-resolution-conflits-dans-travail-equipe-1894.html
Carlos, thank you for your extensive response and references....
Your idea resonates with me more than does any explanation I've encountered or concocted. The next time I find myself in a position to do so, I will try to observe the relationship between the behavior and interaction within the sample and the overarching authority structure and style. I realize I likely would not be an objective observer, but perhaps there may be a reflection of the big picture in the small.
RK
If it is a group meeting to discuss and make decisions regarding action, some kind of committee, then whoever is the chairperson needs to exercise due authority through accepted procedures. There always will be a desire among those present to display their personality, conscious and unconscious, to their own advantage however incongruous and intrusive. If it is a 'work' group then it has to be managed by the chairperson and his/her second, the secretary(?), with clear rules of exchange and interaction, all speaking 'through the Chairperson'. If you want to learn more about group interactions then there is the possibility to enter a group-analytic group which is a group that meets 'without a task' in order to see what happens. Power in groups is generated as inevitably as electricity is by a dynamo; two people meeting will generate power whether as lovers or business partners or as friends. How they manage it and what they do with it - as with any work-group - requires higher levels of understanding and mutuality that are the result of increasing personal understanding and interaction. Group-analysis helps a good deal, though the ideal is never reached.
Try "Experiences in Groups" by W Bion; any of S H Foulkes' five titles, and a decent book on how to conduct business meetings.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education