THEORIES OF SMALL GROUP COMMUNICATION

OUTLINE

1. The majority of small group communication textbooks are grounded in systems theory.
   
   
   1. There are weaknesses associated with systems theory.
      
      
      1. Systems theory tends to favor stability over change, so innovation is often characterized as a system anomaly rather than a normal part of group work.
         
         
      2. The emphasis on harmony in systems theory means that conflict must be presented as abnormal and destructive.
         
         
      3. Systems theory generally ignores issues of power and status that influence small group decision making, particularly when groups are embedded in larger organizations.
         
         
      4. So, while systems theory encourages us to examine the ways in which group members and groups are interrelated, it ignores other aspects of small group communication that are equally as important.
   
   
   
2. Theories influence the way we think, interpret our world, and the actions we take.
   
   
   1. If our theory of communication is centered around the transmission of information, then we'll be concerned with senders who present clear, concise, well-organized messages.
      
      
   2. If we think of communication as performance, then we'll be concerned with shared meanings, sensemaking, and the ways people coordinate their actions.
      
      
   3. No single perfect, all-encompassing theory of small group communication exists.
      
      
      1. Each theory of small groups illuminates some features while hiding others.
         
         
      2. Some theories have greater utility than others because they provide more insight, more practical implications, and lead us to ask more interesting and creative questions about small groups.
   
   
   
3. Functional Theory
   
   
   1. The functional approach to small group communication is concerned with the results or outcomes of group behaviors and structures.
      
      
   2. Research conducted from this perspective suggests that several conditions must exist for group members to make appropriate decisions and effectively solve problems.
      
      
      1. Group members must commit to making the best decision.
         
         
      2. Group members must identify the resources needed to carry out the group's charge.
         
         
      3. Group members must determine procedures for the group to follow.
         
         
      4. Group members must articulate procedural rules and interaction practices.
         
         
      5. Group members must review the decision-making process and make any necessary adjustments to the decision.
      
      
      
   3. The functional perspective focuses on the systematic procedures groups use to accomplish their tasks.
      
      
      1. Group members must demonstrate that they understand the charge.
         
         
      2. Group members must establish criteria with which to evaluate possible solutions.
         
         
      3. Group members must develop alternative solutions.
         
         
      4. Group members must evaluate those alternatives by comparing them to each other and the previously-established criteria.
         
         
      5. Group members must choose an alternative based on the group's evaluation.
      
      
      
   4. The functional approach to small group communication has several strengths.
      
      
      1. Functional theory is prescriptive.
         
         
      2. It emphasizes the purpose communication serves in small groups. It makes it clear that, without communication, group members could not accomplish their goals.
         
         
      3. Researchers from this perspective have studied both laboratory groups and natural groups.
      
      
      
   5. The theory has weaknesses as well.
      
      
      1. Assessing outcomes is challenging.
         
         
      2. Some researchers argue that decision making is not rational.
         
         
      3. Researchers have found it difficult to consistently identify the key group functions essential to small group decision making and problem solving.
   
   
   
4. Symbolic Convergence Theory
   
   
   1. Symbolic Convergence Theory studies the sensemaking function of communication.
      
      
      1. "Symbolic" refers to verbal and nonverbal messages.
         
         
      2. "Convergence" refers to shared understanding and meaning.
      
      
      
   2. Fantasy themes are stories or narratives that assist group members in interpreting group interactions as well as the environment.
      
      
   3. Researchers have observed group members "chaining out" fantasy themes.
      
      
      1. Group members tell a story in a collaborative manner. Often, it is impossible to identify a single narrator.
         
         
      2. By using a symbolic cue that triggers a recall of the fantasy, group members can participate in an inside joke known only to the group.
      
      
      
   4. As group members come to share a number of fantasies, they begin to develop a rhetorical vision of themselves and the group.
      
      
   5. Strengths of Symbolic Convergence Theory
      
      
      1. It focuses on group identity and the development of a group consciousness.
         
         
      2. This theory is descriptive rather than predictive.
         
         
      3. Symbolic Convergence Theory is useful for examining the similarities and differences among groups in terms of in rhetorical visions and fantasy.
      
      
      
   6. Weaknesses of Symbolic Convergence Theory
      
      
      1. Because the theory is not predictive or evaluative, some people do not think it is useful.
         
         
      2. Researchers who apply Symbolic Convergence Theory to small groups tend to assume that fantasies themes and rhetorical visions have one meaning for all group members.
         
         
      3. Symbolic Convergence Theory assumes that all group members have equal influence in creating fantasy themes and rhetorical visions.
   
   
   
5. Structuration Theory
   
   
   1. Structuration Theory differentiates between systems, such as small groups, and structures, the practices, rules, norms, and other resources the system uses to function and sustain itself.
      
      
   2. Structuration refers to the processes group members employ as they work together.
      
      
   3. Structures both produce a system (in this case, a group) and are outcomes of a system.
      
      
      1. According to Structuration Theory, group members interact according to particular rules, and group members also produce those rules through their interactions.
         
         
      2. This suggests that group members can negotiate group structures, yet at the same time, their interactions are constrained by those structures.
      
      
      
   4. Structuration theorists are interested in how group members enact structures in their interactions.
      
      
   5. Strengths of Structuration Theory
      
      
      1. It examines structures in action by focusing on the structuring process.
         
         
      2. Structuration Theory is applicable to a variety of small groups, not just those that perform decision-making and problem-solving functions.
         
         
      3. Structuration Theory recognizes that environmental forces may impinge on group processes.
      
      
      
   6. Weaknesses of Structuration Theory
      
      
      1. Structuration Theory to date has not provided a way of predicting which circumstances will result in the development of particular structures.
         
         
      2. Because structures are both system producers and the outcome of systems, it is difficult to research structuration in small groups.
         
         
      3. It is often difficult to pinpoint which structural changes occurred and when by examining group interaction on a day-to-day basis.
         
         
      4. Structuration Theory can be adapted to individual cases, but because it is flexible, it is difficult to make generalizations based on Structuralist Theory.
   
   
   
6. Naturalistic Paradigm
   
   
   1. When applied to small groups, the Naturalistic Paradigm focuses our attention on "real life" groups.
      
      
      1. The Naturalistic Paradigm addresses a major fault in small group research-its reliance on zero-history groups in which strangers interact in a laboratory setting to solve an artificial problem.
         
         
      2. The Naturalistic Paradigm provides a complex, multi-faceted view of small groups that situates groups in their natural settings.
      
      
      
   2. Research within the Naturalistic Paradigm is qualitative and assumes that researchers' values and biases are part of the research process.
      
      
   3. Central to the Naturalistic Paradigm is the study of human communication as it naturally occurs.
      
      
   4. From this perspective, there is no singular small group reality, but rather multiple realities that group members share to varying degrees.
      
      
   5. Strengths of the Naturalistic Paradigm
      
      
      1. It uses naturally occurring small groups.
         
         
      2. The Naturalistic Paradigm has greatly broadened our conceptualization of small groups and moved the study of small groups outside of corporate contexts and traditional task groups.
         
         
      3. The Naturalistic Paradigm has advanced theory and practice with its studies of how small groups work in their natural contexts.
      
      
      
   6. Weaknesses of the Naturalistic Paradigm
      
      
      1. Determining what constitutes a group in a natural setting can be difficult.
         
         
      2. It can be difficult to maintain power equilibrium between researchers and study participants
         
         
      3. Studies within the Naturalistic Paradigm are case studies, so it is difficult to generalize from their results.

REFERENCES

ADDITIONAL READING

ADDITIONAL READING (instructor)

ONLINE RESOURCES

MAJOR ASSIGNMENT

1. Introduction: state your paper's purpose and points you'll cover.
   
   
2. Explanation of each theory you have chosen: which aspects of small group interaction does each theory highlight? What are the primary arguments from each perspective? What does each perspective assume about small groups, people, and the environment? How does each perspective inform us about small groups? What does each perspective illuminate? What does each perspective hide?
   
   
3. Analysis: using each of the three theories you have chosen, present an analysis of the case. That is, how can we interpret this case from each of the three perspectives?
   
   
4. Evaluation. Based on your analysis, present a critical evaluation of the case. Which insights are more useful? Less useful? Develop your most effective story line.
   
   
5. Finally, discuss the implications of your analysis, in terms of both the prescriptions and the utility of examining a case from multiple perspectives. How useful is each perspective? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach?

ACTIVITIES

1. Near the beginning of the semester, ask students to write down and then discuss in small groups their theories of small groups. Collect their written theories, then have students re-visit their theories near the end of the semester.
   
   
2. Working in small groups, have students develop their own models of small group communication. Using large sheets of paper (rolls of plain newspaper are usually available from your local newspaper) and marking pens, have students visually represent their models. Discuss the similarities and differences among the models, and talk about the subjects each model highlights and the aspects of communication each hides.
   
   
3. To introduce the notion of theory as frame, borrow from Lakoff and Johnson's discussion of love metaphors or Putnam et al's discussion of communication metaphors (students generally find the former more engaging, although the latter is more directly relevant to the class; you can also lead a short discussion of both). Have students describe love or communication, then, in small groups, decide which metaphors those descriptions entail. When processing, reinforce the notion that our theories of love, communication, and small group communication influence the ways we interact and interpret others' behaviors.

MHHE Home | Small Group Home

---

Copyright ©2000 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
For further information about this site contact communications@mcgraw-hill.com.
McGraw-Hill Higher Education is one of the many fine businesses of The McGraw-Hill Companies.