14. Dynamic processes occurring in the group.

The phenomenon of group dynamics is determined ambiguously. M. Robert and F. Telman defined group dynamics as a process by which the interaction between specific individuals reduces the tension between them or brings them to mutual satisfaction.

This process explains the individual's belonging to a group, the attractiveness of the group and group membership; the formation of elemental or informal groups.

The development of group dynamics as a trend in the theory of small groups and social technology is associated with the name of K. Levin .

Each member of the group recognizes its dependence on its other members.

By definition of K. Levin, “group dynamics” is a discipline exploring the positive and negative forces that operate in this group.

In describing and explaining the principles of group dynamics, K. Levin relied on the laws of Gestalt psychology.

If we consider a group as a whole, then the patterns of group dynamics can be explained by the action of two laws:

1) the whole dominates its parts. A group is not just a sum of individuals: it modifies the behavior of its members; From the outside it is easier to influence the behavior of the whole group than the behavior of an individual member; each member acknowledges that he is dependent on all other members;

2) individual elements are combined into a whole. It is not resemblance, but the relationship of members is the basis for the formation of a group; a person is inclined to become a member of the group with which he identifies himself, and not at all the one on which he most depends.

In the modern sense, group dynamics is the development or movement of a group in time, due to the interaction and interrelations of the group members with each other, as well as external influence on the group.

The concept of group dynamics includes five basic elements and several additional ones.

The main elements are group goals, group norms, group structure and leadership problem, group cohesion, group development phases.

Additional elements - the creation of a subgroup (as the development of the group structure); personal relationship with a group.

Modern researchers of the problems of group dynamics distinguish three of its mechanisms: the resolution of intra-group contradictions, “idiosyncratic credit” and psychological exchange.

The expression of intra-group contradictions is a conflict.

In the theory of group dynamics, he acts as an integrator of new structures.

The term “idiosyncratic credit” was introduced by E. Hollander . This concept denotes behavior deviating from group norms.

“Idiosyncratic credit” is a mechanism of group dynamics, when a group gives permission for deviant behavior to its leader or its individual members in order to achieve their goals.

Behavior deviance is in the nature of innovation and launches a new mechanism for group dynamics.

A small group can be viewed in three ways: as a medium for changing group members; as an object of change; as a change agent (when organizational group efforts are used).

Dynamic processes characterize the situation in the group.

The nature of changes that occur in a small group can be traced when considering the problems of group development.

The idea of ​​the development of the group was identified in the psychoanalytic concept .

The impetus was given by the work of Z. Freud “Group Psychology and Ego Analysis”.

There was a theory of the development of the group of G. Sheppard.

It is built on understanding the processes that occur in the training groups.

The idea of ​​group development: there are two phases that stand out, in each of which the group solves a certain set of problems.

Each group may implement the general development model in different ways: demonstrate deviations or simply disintegrate if the goal is not achieved.

Contact with real groups made the authors pay attention to the other side of the functioning of the group, which was not previously studied.

R. Moreland and J. Levine introduced the concept of “socialization of a group”, with the help of which, by analogy with the process of socialization of an individual, the process of group development is considered.

Criteria on the basis of which it is possible to compare different stages in the development of a group: assessment (group goals, its position among other groups, meaning of goals for its members); group obligations towards members); transformation of the roles of group members (greater or less inclusiveness of group members, their identification with it).

Based on the criteria, periods in the life of the group and the corresponding positions of the members are fixed.

The combinations of periods and positions are reflected in the system-procedural model of group development proposed by M. Chemers .

Introduced the concept of stages (periods) of development of the group, which differ in the set of criteria.

Each stage is associated with a change in the composition of the group.

The factors changing the roles of group members are the measure of each member’s group’s acceptance and the member’s acceptance of the group’s reality.

As a second block of research, where the idea of ​​the group’s development is indicated, one can name research comparing individual orientations: collectivism - individualism .

They are considered as polar concepts.

Individualism gives rise to specific norms of individual behavior in a group: an orientation not toward group goals, but toward one’s own goals, striving to emphasize one’s contribution to group activities.

Collectivism as the norm of traditional societies determines the relationship of an individual with a small group: a positive attitude towards the goals of the group, an equalizing distribution of “benefits” in it, greater openness and communication, a willingness to put the goals of the group above their own.

Orientations are associated with the group's development process: the transition from one phase to another largely depends on what specific orientation style, and therefore, behavior, “wins” in the group and thereby will facilitate or prevent the transition to a new phase.

Just as in the first block of the analyzed studies, the idea of ​​the dependence of the development of groups on the type of society in which they exist is important here.