improving group climate

29
Improving Group Climate Deborah Henderson Western Washington University

Upload: merv

Post on 21-Jan-2016

39 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Improving Group Climate. Deborah Henderson Western Washington University. Contents. Defensive and Supportive Climates Confirmation and Disconfirmation Group Cohesiveness. Defensive & Supportive Climates Evaluation vs. Description. Description - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Improving Group Climate

Improving Group ClimateDeborah Henderson

Western Washington University

Page 2: Improving Group Climate

Contents

Defensive and Supportive Climates Confirmation and Disconfirmation Group Cohesiveness

Page 3: Improving Group Climate

Defensive & Supportive ClimatesEvaluation vs. Description

DescriptionDescription is contrasting what a person says and describing the person’s thoughts.

“As I think through your idea I believe there might be some other problems.”

EvaluationEvaluation is taking something someone says and making them feel judged.

“You big dummy that is the most stupid thing I have ever heard.”

Page 4: Improving Group Climate

Control vs. Problem Orientation

ControlControl is communicative behavior that attempts to control someone and produces defensiveness.

“I know what is good for you do it this way.”

Problem OrientationProblem orientation is communication that attempts to solve problems. It opens up a range of choices and shares decision making. It creates a supportive climate, greater cohesiveness, and increased productivity.

“Let’s find a solution that both of us can feel good about.”

Page 5: Improving Group Climate

Strategy vs. Spontaneity

StrategyStrategy is preplanned manipulative communication such as throwing a fit or withholding information. Defensiveness occurs when people feel others are running their own agendas or concealing their true motives.

“Oh your nails are just fabulous no wonder you type like a snail.”

SpontaneitySpontaneity is acting honestly and at the moment without hidden agendas. Spontaneous responses disclose true feelings and motives and creates a supportive climate.

Page 6: Improving Group Climate

Neutrality vs. Empathy

NeutralityNeutrality is behaving in an detached uncaring way. Acting like you have no concern for the outcome of the group or the members. The perception by group members is that of indifference, this behavior produces defensiveness in groups

EmpathyEmpathy is being concerned about your group members, their feelings, your relationship with them and the direction of your group. It creates a supportive climate.

Page 7: Improving Group Climate

Superiority vs. Equality

SuperioritySuperiority is when someone points out that they are better than you and have more worth. It shuts down feedback and creates a defensive group climate.

“Obviously, I know the best way.”

EqualityEquality is communication based on mutual respect and trust. This is achieved by expressing mutual trust and being genuinely open to other’s views. It creates a supportive group climate.

“I am okay and you are okay too.”

Page 8: Improving Group Climate

Certainty vs. Provisionalism

CertaintyCertainty occurs when a person takes a rigid position and shows intolerance to other’s ideas because their ideas are truths. This produces a defensive climate in groups and shuts down dialogue. Over time the person who is certain intimidates others.

“My mind is made up, don’t bother me with facts.”

ProvisionalismProvisionalism is being open to new ideas, being somewhat flexible, and being committed to solving problems. It builds supportive group climates.

Page 9: Improving Group Climate

Confirmation & Disconfirmation

Confirmation Direct

acknowledgment Agreement about

content Supportive response Clarifying response Expression of

positive feeling

Disconfirmation Impervious

response Interrupting

response Irrelevant response Tangential response Impersonal

response Incoherent response Incongruous

response

Page 10: Improving Group Climate

Confirmation

“By using confirming rather than disconfirming responses when communicating with other group members, people contribute toward a

supportive, trustful climate and therefore promote greater group effectiveness and

individual satisfaction.” Beebe and Masterson

Page 11: Improving Group Climate

Direct Acknowledgment

A speaker acknowledges another person’s communication and reacts to it directly and

verbally

Page 12: Improving Group Climate

Agreement about Content

A speaker reinforces information expressed by another or confirms someone’s evaluation of something.

Page 13: Improving Group Climate

Supportive Response

A speaker expresses understanding of another person or reassures or makes the other person feel better.

Page 14: Improving Group Climate

Clarifying Response

A speaker tries to clarify another’s message or feeling by requesting more information and encouraging other’s to share more or by paraphrasing and confirming understanding.

Page 15: Improving Group Climate

Expression of Positive Feeling

When a group member expresses positive feelings related to what another person has said.“Wow I get what your saying now.”

Page 16: Improving Group Climate

Disconfirmation

Disconfirming responses cause people to feel less valued, mistrust in group members develops and uncertainty about group roles

and self needs increases. Group tasks, processes and cohesiveness decrease.

Page 17: Improving Group Climate

Disconfirming Behavior

Denial of Presence Silence when reply is expected Looks away while other is speaking Engages in unrelated activities while other is speaking

Denial of Involvement Avoids eye contact Uses nonverbal distancing behaviors Impersonal language: avoids statements of disclosure of

any kind

Rejection of Communication Monologue, repeated interruption, “talking over” others Interjects irrelevant comments

Page 18: Improving Group Climate

Impervious Response

No response--seemingly oblivious to what was said.

 

Page 19: Improving Group Climate

Interrupting Response

Interjecting your comments while the other person is talking. Finishing the other person’s statements.

Page 20: Improving Group Climate

Irrelevant Response

Giving a response that has nothing to do with what the other person has just said or introducing a new topic disregarding the current conversation.

Page 21: Improving Group Climate

Tangential Response

Starting to respond to the other person’s statement, but then changing the topic. “Yes…but …. “

Page 22: Improving Group Climate

Impersonal Response

A speaker conducts a monologue, intellectualizes or uses third person to trivialize the other’s comments. “You” or “one” statements are extensively used as well as clichés.

Page 23: Improving Group Climate

Incoherent Response

A rambling and unintelligible response, using incomplete sentences and statements that are difficult to follow.

“You know, I mean, you know…”

Page 24: Improving Group Climate

Incongruous Response

When verbal and nonverbal messages are inconsistent.“Mad, I am not mad, what is wrong with

you, are you crazy?”

Page 25: Improving Group Climate

Group Cohesiveness

The degree of attraction members feel towards one another and the group. A feeling of deep loyalty. Groups which are cohesive tend to be happier and more productive. ~McBride

Page 26: Improving Group Climate

Group CohesivenessComposition

Similarity, interpersonal attraction and diversity of group members

Complementary needs of members Group tasks & relationship balances Goal path clarity in task oriented groups Value similarity in friendship groups Cooperation

Page 27: Improving Group Climate

Group CohesivenessIndividual Benefits

When people are in a successful group that satisfies their needs they have a stronger

connection with their group. This is similar to relationships with close friends or family

Page 28: Improving Group Climate

Group CohesivenessCommunication

Proper communication is the driving force of a successful group. The combination of quality

communication and the amount of communication that a group engages in affects

cohesiveness.

Page 29: Improving Group Climate

References

Anderson, A. B. (1975). Combined effects of interpersonal attraction and goal-path clarity on the cohesiveness of task oriented groups. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 31(1), 68-75. doi:10.1037/h0076233

Beebe, S., & Masterson, J. (2012). Communicating in small groups: Principles and practices. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Gibb, J. (2013, July 25). Defensive Communication [Webpage]. Retrieved from htttp://www.aamr.org

McBride, M. (2006). "-ing" Project: Encouraging Cohesion in Small Groups. Communication Teacher, 20(2), 53-56.

Phillips, B. N., & D'Amico, L. A. (1956). Effects of cooperation and competition on the cohesiveness of small face-to-face groups. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 47(2), 65-70. doi:10.1037/h0043773

Sieburg, E. & Leone, K. (2013, July 26). Patterns of international confirmation and disconfirmation [Webpage]. Retrieved from http://communication.usf.edu