Leadership: How Groups Choose Leaders

It is obvious that one of the issues that a group must work out is who is to be leader. Fisher provides some interesting insights into how the leadership problem is solved in groups. In Fisher’s mind, leadership is not a story of one member rising through the ranks to triumph because of natural ability or clever manipula­tion. Rather, leadership is a matter of not making mistakes. For Fisher, the process of leader emergence is a process of elimination.

Fisher believes that in the beginning, all members of a group are in con­tention for the leadership position (or positions). Every time members commu­nicate, they are making a bid to be leader, although they may not be aware of what they are doing. Over time, most members take themselves out of contention. First, nonparticipators and those who are ill informed or closed-minded and rigid are eliminated. Next other members drop out of the contest by casting themselves in secondary roles. They become lieutenants for more active contenders. Often, two opposing factions emerge, each headed by a leader contender and supported by one or more lieutenants. Finally, one coali­tion drops out, leaving most of the influence in the hands of a single leader and his or her party.

Of course, groups do not need to have a single leader. Theoretically, there is no reason why leadership cannot be shared. Leadership, after all, is any behavior that moves a group toward the accomplishment of task or maintenance goals. In most groups, however, certain individuals wield more influence than others, and consequently perform more leadership behaviors. Of course, groups exhibit many leadership patterns. Some groups never solve their status prob­lem, and members are still fighting one another when they disband. Others shift between temporary leaders or appoint two leaders, one to handle task mat­ters and the other to take charge of maintenance. And a few rare groups find a way to share leadership equally.

Strengthening Group Discussion Skills

There are a few ways you can prepare to be a more effective group communicator. To work effectively groups must concern themselves with creating a positive climate as well as with working productively.

Some years ago, Jack Gibb described the kinds of behaviors that can lead to competitive, defensive climates and those that can lead to cooperative, supportive climates. Gibb believed that in a defensive climate, in which group mem­bers feel threatened, the group is unproductive. To the extent that group members sense evaluation, control, strategy, neutrality, superiority, and certainty on the part of others, they close down and refuse to cooperate. By replacing these behaviors with description, problem orientation, spontaneity, empathy, equal­ity, and provisionalism, a group can create a supportive climate.

Evaluation occurs when individuals are judgmental toward one another, when their comments imply that they are appraising and criticizing one another’s behavior. Description, on the other hand, arouses little defensiveness, because it focuses on presenting feelings or opinions without assigning blame. It is better for a group member to express concern about a deadline by describing his or her feelings (“I’m concerned about getting the work done as soon as possible, because I have commitments at the end of the month”) than by evaluating (“This group has got to stop wasting time and being lazy”). Control is another behavior that increases defensiveness. When members try to impose their will on others (“The only way to get this done is to...”) rather than trying to collaborate (“Does anyone have ideas about how to get the job done”), they are likely to meet resistance. The opposite of control is taking a problem orientation.

Strategy occurs when group members’ behavior is prompted by hidden agendas. Feeling manipulated naturally leads to defensiveness. The corresponding supportive behavior is spontaneity, whereby the member communicates in an open and honest manner. Neutrality, although it sounds positive, can often signal indifference and a lack of commitment. On the other hand, empathy tells others that you understand their thoughts and feelings. As we saw in the last chapter, the use of the paraphrasing response can indicate concern and empathy. Compare the following two responses: “Okay if you want to do it that way...” and “What you’re saying is that you’re really concerned about getting this done on time, and you want to do your best.” The second response shows a great deal more empathy. The first might be read as indicating disinterest.

Superiority should be avoided as much as possible, for superior responses lead to jealousy and resentment. Instead, members should be careful to indicate equality by asking for others’ opinions and weighing everyone’s contributions equally. Finally, having too great a sense of certainty can lead to an unpleasant group climate. Provisionalism, in contrast, signals a willingness to listen openly to others’ ideas. Group members should monitor themselves to make sure they are not inadvertently making others defensive. It is easy to come across as superior or certain even when you may not mean to; insensitivity to others’ feelings can lead to neutrality or evalu­ation. Without realizing it, we can easily hurt one another’s feelings and make groups frustrating and unpleasant. By recognizing the need to be more support­ive and open and by listening empathically, members can improve the social climate of their groups.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16