I.

Laboratory Training Groups

A. History

By: Angel Balibrea

In 1947, the National Training Laboratories Institute began in Bethel, ME. They pioneered the use of T-groups (Laboratory Training) in which the learners use here and now experience in the group, feedback among participants and theory on human behavior to explore group process and gain insights into themselves and others. The goal is to offer people options for their behavior in groups. The T-group was a great training innovation which provided the base for what we now know about team building. This was a new method that would help leaders and managers create a more humanistic, people serving system and allow leaders and managers to see how their behavior actually affected others. There was a strong value of concern for people and a desire to create systems that took people's needs and feelings seriously.

T-groups were widely used in church training programs from the 60s into the 80s and since 2000 have been resurrected in several church networks. There also seems to be a renewed effort coming from NTL about T-group training.

B. Description

A T-group or training group (sometimes also referred to as sensitivity-training group, human relations training group or encounter group) is a form of group training where participants themselves (typically, between eight and 15 people) learn about themselves (and about small group processes in general) through their interaction with each other. They use feedback, problem solving, and role play to gain insights into themselves, others, and groups.

A T-group meeting does not have an explicit agenda, structure, or express goal. Under the guidance of a facilitator, the participants are encouraged to share emotional reactions (such as, for example, anger, fear, warmth, or envy) that arise in response to their fellow participants' actions and statements. The emphasis is on sharing emotions, as opposed to judgments or conclusions. In this way, T-group participants can learn how their words and actions trigger

emotional responses in the people they communicate with. Many varieties of T-groups have existed, from the initial T-groups that focused on small group dynamics, to those that aim more explicitly to develop self-understanding and interpersonal communication. Industry also widely used T-groups, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s, and in many ways these were predecessors of current team building and corporate culture initiatives.

A T-Group is not a group discussion or a problem solving group.

The group's work is primarily process rather than content oriented. The focus tends to be on the feelings and the communication of feelings, rather than on the communication of information, opinions, or concepts. This is accomplished by focusing on the 'here and now' behavior in the group. Attention is paid to particular behaviors of participants not on the "whole person", feedback is non-evaluative and reports on the impact of the behavior on others. The participant has the opportunity to become a more authentic self in relation to others through selfdisclosure and receiving feedback from others. The Johari Window is a model that looks at that process.

C. Objectives of T-Group Learning: The T-Group is intended to provide you the opportunity to: Increase your understanding of group development and dynamics. Gaining a better understanding of the underlying social processes at work within a group. Increase your skill in facilitating group effectiveness. Increase interpersonal skills Experiment with changes in your behavior Increase your awareness of your own feelings in the moment; and offer you the opportunity to accept responsibility for your feelings. Increase your understanding of the impact of your behavior on others. Increase your sensitivity to others' feelings. Increase your ability to give and receive feedback. Increase your ability to learn from your own and a group's experience. Increase your ability to manage and utilize conflict.

D. Methods: One way of describing what may happen for a participant is:

1. Unfreezing habitual responses to situations -- this is facilitated by the participant's own desire to explore new ways of behaving and the trainer staying non-directive, silent, and providing little structure or task agenda.

2. Self-generated and chosen change by the participant.

3. Reinforce new behavior by positive feedback, participants own assessment of whether what is happening is closer to what she/he intends, supportive environment, trust development.

E. Sources of Change in Groups: Self-observation - participants give more attention to their own intentions, feelings, etc. Feedback - participants receive information on the impact they have on others Insight - participants expand self-knowledge Self-disclosure - participants exposes more of themselves to others Universality - participants experience that others share their difficulties, concerns or hopes Group Cohesion - participants experience trust, acceptance & understanding) Hope - participant see others learn, achieve their goals, improve, and cope more effectively Vicarious Learning - participants pick up skills and attitudes from others Catharsis - participants experience a sense of release or breakthrough

F. The role of the trainers: To help the group and individuals analyze and learn from what is happening in the group. The trainer may draw attention to events and behavior in the group and invite the group to look at its experience. At times the trainer may offer tentative interpretations. To offer theory, a model or research that seems related to what the group is looking at.

To encourage the group to follow norms that tend to serve the learning process, e.g., focusing on "here & now" rather than the "then & there". To offer training and coaching in skills that tend to help the learning process, e.g., feedback skills, EIAG, etc. To not offer structure or an agenda. To remain silent, allowing the group to experience its anxiety about acceptance, influence, etc. To be willing to disclose oneself, to be open with the group. On occasion being willing to offer feedback and challenge a participant. To avoid becoming too directive, clinical, or personally involved.

II. T-Group Trainers/Teachers

By: Karla Mae Molina

Robert Tannenbaum attorney, author of crime novels, and the creator of a series of novels 1952-1953: He conducted the what would now be called TEAM BUILDING at the U.S. Naval Ordinance Test Station at China Lake, California. The term vertically structured groups was used with groups dealing with personal topics organizational topics. Appears to be the first non-degree training program in O.D. and with

 Chris Argyris born July 16, 1923 in Newark, New Jersey, USA an American business theorist, Professor Emeritus at Harvard Business School, and a Thought Leader at Monitor Group A faculty member at Yale University (later at Harvard), was one of the first to conduct team building sessions with CEO and the top executive team Make extensive contributions to theory and research on laboratory training, OD and organizational learning

Douglas McGregor Social psychologist who became the President of Antioch College He was a professor of management at MIT and his name is linked most often with Theory Y. First behavioral scientists to address the transfer problem and to talk systematically about and to help implement the application of T-Group skills in complex organizations.

 Herbert Shepard made a significant contribution to Organization Development He held faculty posts at several universities including M.I.T., where he received his doctorate in Industrial Economics 1960: He founded and directed the first doctoral program in OD at Case Western Reserve developed a residency in administrative psychiatry at Yale University School of Medicine President of the Gestalt Professional Institute of

Cleveland and The Institute. Robert Blake

Development

Blake was born in 1918 1941: studied psychology at Berea College, University of Virginia, where he took his M.A. 1947: then at the University of Texas at Austin, where he took his Ph.D. 1964: He stayed at the University of Texas as a professor 1992: receiving an LL.D an American management theoretician He did pioneer work the field of organizational dynamics. Along with Shepard at Baton Rouge, the two initiated a series of two-week laboratories attended by all members of middle management. Combined the case method with the laboratory method, but their designs soon emphasized T-groups, organizational exercises and lectures.

 Jane Mounton studied pure mathematics and physics at the University of Texas 1951: received an M.A. in psychology from Florida State University 1957: received a Ph.D. from the University of Texas Jane Mounton and Robert Blake 1950-1960: Robert Blake and Jane Mouton worked together at the psychology department of the University of Texas. They are known primarily for the development of the Managerial Grid as a framework for

understanding managerial behaviour. They subsequently set up a company, Scientific Methods Inc., to disseminate their ideas on organizational effectiveness. Richard Beckhard a pioneer in the field of organizational development 1967: He co-launched Development the Addison-Wesley Series and began development and management

Organization

the Organization Development Network 1969: published his classic work, Organization Development: Strategies and Models He helped to define organizational development as: "an effort (1) planned, (2) organization-wide, (3) managed from the top, to (4) increase organization

effectiveness and health through (5) planned interventions in the organization's 'processes', using behavioural-science knowledge". Warren Bennis born March 8, 1925 an American scholar, author, widely organizational as a consultant pioneer of and the

regarded

contemporary field of Leadership studies. He is one of the major figures associated with the evolution of the OD field

Eva Schindler-Rainman one of the few volunteerism pioneers to gain popularity both within and outside of our field. An organizational consultant, social worker with a PhD, and behavioral scientist, she was known for her advocacy of effective human resource development paid and volunteer - and for non-traditional organization design and development. First person to be an NTL staff member doing OD work and having been trained almost exclusively in the social work field.

III. Function Roles of Group Members

A. Introduction

By: Joan Orillo

Group effectiveness depends upon many things. The size of the group, the personal characteristics of the members, the physical setting, the nature of the group's task, the style of the leadership, the group motivation towards fulfilling the task are all important to an effective group. There are many more.

Whenever we make a suggestion or offer a confounding in a meeting, we are playing a role or roles. In general, we are doing one of three things: (1) We my be offering a suggestion that helps accomplish the objective of the group, (2) we may be trying to maintain or improve the social relationships within the group or (3) we may be trying to satisfy our own psychological needs.

In the fist are we are playing a group-task role which may take many forms, such as suggesting ideas, giving information, or seeking opinions from other group members. In the second instance we are playing a group-building or maintenance role. This can also take several forms, such as trying to harmonize a strained relationship or encouraging participation e other group members. Finally, in the third are we are playing an individual sold, which is also recognized in several forms. One of the most recognizable individual roles is the "blocker." This individual attempts to block constructive suggestions of other group members, and thus slows the group's progress.

Group members and leaders who understand there group-member roles and their effects can use this understanding to increase group effectiveness. The understanding must be great enough so that the leader of group members can recognize (1) the role(s) which need to be played when the meeting bogs down, or (2) how individual roles may be slowing group progress.

B. Classification of Members Role

The following analysis of functional member roles was developed in ayo with tin First

National Laboratory in Group Development, 1947. It follows closely the analysis of participation functions used in coding the content of group records for research purposes. A similar analysis operated in faculty efforts to train group members in their functional roles during the course of the laboratory.

The member-roles identified in this analysis are classified into three broad groupings.

1. Group Task Roles. Participant roles here are related to the task which the group is deciding to undertake or has undertaken. Their purpose is to facilitate and coordinate group effort in the selection and definition of a common problem and in the solution of that problem.

2. Group Building and Maintenance Roles. The roles in this category are oriented toward the functioning of the group as a group. They are designed to alter or maintain the group way of working, to strengthen, regulate, and perpetuate the group as a group.

3. Individual Roles. This category does not classify member-roles as such the "participations" denoted here are directed toward the satisfaction of the "participant's" individual needs. Their purpose is some individual goal which is not relevant either to the group task or to the functioning of tin group as a group. Such participants are, of course, highly relevant to the problem of group training, insofar as such training is directed toward improving group maturity or group task efficiency.

C. Group Task Roles

The following analysis assumes that the task of the discussion group is to select, define, and solve common problems. The roles are identified in relation to functions of facilitation and coordination of group problem-solving activities. Each member may of course enact more than one role in any given unit of participation and a wide range of there solos may be played at times by the group "leader" as well as by various members.

1. The Initiator-Contributor suggests or proposes to the group new ideas or a changed way of

regarding the group problem or goal. The novelty proposed may take the form of suggestions of a new group goal or a new definition of the problem. It may take the form of a suggested solution or some way of handling a difficulty that the group has encountered. Or it may take the form of a proposed new procedure of the group, a new way of organizing the group for the task ahead.

2. The Information Seeker asks for clarification of suggestions made in terms of their actual adequacy, for authoritative information and facts pertinent to the problem being disbursed.

3. The Information Giver offers facts or generalizations which are "authoritative" or relates his own experience pertinently to the group problem.

4. The Opinion Seeker asks not primarily for the facts of the case but for a clarification of the values involved in a suggestion made or in alternative suggestions.

5. The Opinion Giver states his belief or opinion pertinently to a suggestion made or to alternative suggestions. The emphasis is oo his proposal of what should become the group's view of pertinent values, not primarily upon relevant facts or information.

6. The Elaborator spells out suggestions in terms of examples or developed meanings, offers a rationale for suggestions previously made, and tries to deduce how an idea or suggestion would work out he adopted by the group.

7. The Coordinator shows or clarifies the relationships among various ideas and suggestions together, or tries to coordinate the activities of various members or subgroups.

8. The Orienter defines the position of the group with respect to its goals by summarizing what has occurred, points to departures from agreed-upon directions or goals, or raises question is taking.

9. The Evaluator-Critic subjects the accomplishment of the group to some standard or set of

standards of group-functioning in the context of the group tasks. Thus he may evaluate or question the "practicality," the "logic," the "facts," or the "procedure" of a suggestion or of some unit of group discussion.

10. The Energizer prods the group to action or decision, attempts to stimulate or arouse the group to greater or higher quality activity. 11. The Procedural Technician expedites group movement by doing things for the group performing routine tasks (e.g., distributing materials) or manipulating objects for the group (e.g., rearranging the seating or running the recording machine, etc.)

12. The Recorder writes down suggestions, makes a record of group discussions, or writes down the product of discussion. The recorder role is the group memory.

D. Group Building Maintenance Roles

Here the analysis of member-functions is oriented to those participations which have for their purpose the building of group-centered attitudes and orientation among the members of a group or the maintenance and perpetuation of such group-centered behavior. A given contribution may involve several roles and a member or the leader may perform various roles in successive contributions.

1. The Encourager praises, agrees with, and accepts the contribution of others. He indicates warmth and solidarity in his attitude toward other group members, offers commendation and praise, and in various ways indicates understanding and acceptance of other points of view, ideas, and suggestions.

2. The Harmonizer mediates the differences between other members, attempts to reconcile disagreements, relieves tension in conflict situations through jesting or pouring oil on the trouble waters, etc.

3. The Compromiser operates from within a conflict in which his idea or position is involved. He may offer compromise by yielding status, admitting his error, by disciplining himself to maintain group harmony, or by coming half-way in moving along with the group.

4. The Gate-Keeper and Expediter attempts to keep communication channel open by encouraging or facilitating the participation of others (We havent got the ideas of Mr. X yet, etc.) or by proposing regulation of the flow of communication (Why don't we limit the length of our contributions so that every one will have a chance to contribute?, etc.)

5. The Standard Setter or Ego Ideal expresses standards for the group to attempt to achieve in its functioning or applies standards in evaluating the quality of group processes.

6. The Group-Observer and Commentator keeps record of various aspects of group process and feeds such data with proposed interruptions into the group's evaluation of its own procedures.

7. The Follower goes along with the movement of the group, more or less passively accepting the ideas of others, serving as an audience in group discussion and decision. E. Individual Roles Attempts by members: of a group to satisfy individual needs which are irrelevant to the group task and which are non-oriented or negatively oriented to the group building and maintenance set problem group and member training. A high incidence of individual-centered as opposed to group-centered participation in a group always calls for self-diagnosis of the group. The diagnosis may reveal one or several of a number of conditions low level of skilltraining among members, including the group leader; the prevalence of authoritarian and laissez faire points of view toward group functioning in the group; a low level of group maturity, discipline, and morale; and inappropriately chosen and inadequately defined group task, etc. whatever the diagnosis, it is in this setting that the training needs of the group are to be discovered and group training efforts to meet these needs are to be defined. The outright

suppression of individual roles will deprive the group data needed for really adequate self diagnosis and therepy. 1. The Agressor may work in many waysdeflating the status of others, expressing disapproval of the values, acts, or feelings of others, attacking the group or the problem it is working on, joking aggressively, showing envy toward another's contribution by trying to take credit for in, etc.

2. The Blocker tends to be negativistic and stubbornly resistant, disagreeing and opposing without or beyond reason and attempting to maintain or bring back an issue after the group has rejected or bypassed it.

3. The Recognition-Seeker works in various ways to call attention to himself, whether through boasting, reporting on personal achievements, acting in unusual ways, struggling to prevent his being placed in an inferior position, etc.

4. The Self-Confesor uses the audience opportunity which the group setting provides to express personal, nongroup-oriented, feeling, :insight, ideology, etc.

5. The Playboy makes a display of his lack of involvement in the group's processes. This may take the from of cynicism, nonchalant, horseplay, and more or less studied forms of out of field behavior.

6. The Dominator tries to assert authority or superiority in manipulating the group or certain members of the group. This domination may take the form of flattery, of asserting a superior status or right to attention, giving directions authoritatively, interrupting the contribution of others, etc. 7. The Help-Seeker attempts to call forth sympathy response from other group members or from the whole group, whether through expressions of insecurity, personal confusion or depreciation of himself beyond reason.

8. the Special Interest Pleader speaks for the small business man, the grass roots,

community, the housewife, labor, and so forth, usually cloaking his own prejudices or biases in the stereotype which best fits his individual need.

IV. Intergroup Problems in Organization V. Intergroup Team Building Interventions

By: Bryan Jay Orpiada

By: Patrick Gueta

Intergroup Team Building Interventions intends to increase communications and interactions between work related groups to reduce the amount of dysfunctional competition and to replace a parochial independent point of view with an awareness of the necessity for interdependence of action calling on the best efforts of both the groups. Inter-group interventions are integrated into Organizational Development programs to facilitate cooperation and efficiency between different groups within an organization. For instance, departmental interaction often deteriorates in larger organizations as different divisions battle for limited resources or become detached from the needs of other departments. Conflict resolution meetings are one common inter-group intervention. First, different group leaders are brought together to get their commitment to the intervention. Next, the teams meet separately to make a list of their feelings about the other group(s). Then the groups meet and share their lists. Finally, the teams meet to discuss the problems and to try to develop solutions that will help both parties. This type of intervention helps to gradually diffuse tension between groups caused by lack of communication and misunderstanding.

Blake, Shepard and mouton came up with a method which is used between groups that are strained and overly hostile. The process is to obtain commitment from the leaders of each group on their willingness to find procedures that will improve inter group relations. Groups are put in different rooms. The task of each group is to generate two lists. They should put down thoughts, attitudes, perceptions and feelings about the other group, predict what the other group will say about them. The groups come together and share their lists. No comments or

discussions, only clarity. The groups reconvene to discuss their reactions to what they have learned about themselves from what the other group has said identify issues that still need to be resolved between the two groups. The two groups come together and share their lists, they set priorities, and they generate action steps and assign responsibilities. A follow up meeting is convened to ensure that the action steps have been taken. The method can be used with more than two groups where the hostility between the groups may not be extreme or severe. In this method, each group, separately compiles two types of lists namely a positive feedback list, a bug list and an empathy list. The two groups come together and share the lists; there is no discussion, except for seeking clarification. The total group generates a list of major problems and unresolved issues between the two groups. These issues are ranked in terms of importance. Sub groups are formed with members from each group, who then discuss and work through each item. The sub-groups report to the larger group. On the basis of the report back and all the other information gathered, the group proceeds to: generate action steps for resolving the conflict, assign responsibilities for each step and record a date by which the steps ought to have been carried out. With this method the two groups work together effectively.

A. Steps in Intergroup Team Building Interventions The leader of the two groups is asked if they want an ameliorative mechanism for the solution. If yes, the groups meet in separate rooms and build two lists. The two groups come together to share each other the information on the list. Now the groups discuss the areas of disagreement and friction separately and make a list of priority issues which is usually much smaller than the previous one. The two groups come back together and share their list, after comparing it they together list the issues which should be resolved. They set priorities and together they take action for resolving the problem. The groups or the leaders assess how the group is doing their action plan. They follow up the intergroup team-building activity to monitor it.

B. Inter-group conflict

Inter group conflicts are characterized by perception of the other as the enemy, stereotyping, constipated, distorted and inaccurate communication and stoppage of feedback and data input. Each group begins to praise itself and its products more positively and believes that it can do no wrong and the other can do no right. There might even be acts of sabotage against the other group. Using the idea of a common enemy outside the group that both groups dislike to bring them closer, increasing interaction and communication under favorable conditions and finding a super ordinate goal that both groups desire. Rotating members of the group, Training, etc are helpful strategies that have been used to deal with inter-group conflict.

VI. Intergroup Relations Interventions

Intergroup Relations Interventions

By: Cherry Joy Flores

The ability to diagnose and understand intergroup relations is important for OD practitioners because, 1. Groups often must work with and through other groups to accomplish their goals 2. Groups within the organization often create problems and place demand on each other; and 3. The quality of the relationships between groups can affect the degree of organizational effectiveness.

A. Microcosm Group

A microcosm group consists of small number of individuals who reflect the issue being addressed. For example, a microcosm group composed of members representing a spectrum of ethnic backgrounds, cultures, and races can be created to address diversity issues in the organization. This group, assisted by OD practitioners, can create programs and processes targeted at specific problems. In addition to addressing diversity problems, omicrocosm groups have been used to carry out organization diagnoses, solve communications problems, integrate two cultures, smooth the transition to a new structure, and address dysfunctional political process.

A.1 Application Stages

The process of using a microcosm group to address organizationwide issues involves the following five steps:

1. Identify an issue- This step involves finding a systemwide problem to be addressed. This may result from an organizational diagnosis or may be an idea generated by an organization member or task force. 2. Convene the group- Once an issue is identified, the microcosm group can be formed. The most important convening principle is that group membership needs to reflect the appropriate mix of stakeholders related to the issue. Convening the group also draws attention to the issue and gives the group status. Members also need to be perceived as credible representatives of the problem. This will increase the likelihood that organization members will listen to and follow the suggestions they make. 3. Provide group training- Once the microcosm group is established, training is provided in group problem solving and decision making. Team-building interventions also may be appropriate. 4. Address the issue- This step involves solving the problem and implementing solutions. OD practitioners may help the group diagnose, design, implement, and evaluate changes. A key issue is gaining commitment in the wider organization to implementing the groups solutions. 5. Dissolve the group- The microcosm group can be disbanded following successful implementation of changes. This typically involves writing a final report or holding a final meeting.

A.2 Results of Microcosm Groups

The microcosm group intervention derives from an intergroup relations theory developed by Alderfer and has been applied by him to communications and race-relations problems. A microcosm group that addressed communications issues improved the way meetings were conducted; developed a job posting, career development, and promotion program; and conducted new-employee orientations.

A dearth of research exists on microcosm groups, partly because it is difficult to measure parallel processes and associate them with measures of organizational processes. More research on this intervention is needed.

B. Resolving Intergroup Conflict

The intergroup conflict intervention is designed specifically to help two groups or departments within an organization resolve dysfunctional conflicts. Intergroup conflict is neither good nor bad in itself, and in some cases, conflict among departments is necessary and productive for organization. This applies where there is little interdependence among departments and conflict or competition among them can spur higher levels of productivity.

B.1 Application Stages

A basic strategy for improving interdepartmental or intergroup relationships is to change the perceptions (perhaps, more accurately, misperceptions) that the two groups have of each other. One formal approach for accomplishing this, originally described by Blake and his associates, consists of a ten-step procedure.

1. A consultant external to the two groups obtains their agreement to work directly on improving intergroup relationships. 2. A time is set for the two groups to meet-preferably away from their normal work situations. 3. The consultant, together with the managers of the two groups, describes the purpose and objectives of the meeting- to develop better mutual relationships, explore the perceptions the group have of each other, and formulate plans for improving the relationship. The two groups are presented the following or similar questions: What qualities or attributes best describe our group? What qualities or attributes best describe the other group? and How do we think the other group will describe us? Then, the two groups are encouraged to establish norms of openness for feedback and discussion. 4. The two groups are assigned to separate rooms and asked to write their answers to the three questions.

5. After completing their lists, the two groups reconvene. A representative from each group presents the written statements. Only the two representatives are allowed to speak. 6. When it is clear that the two groups thoroughly understand the content of the lists, they separate again. By this point, a great number of misperceptions and discrepancies have been brought to light. 7. The task of the two groups is to analyze and review the reasons for the discrepancies. The emphasis is on solving the problems and reducing the misperceptions. The actual or implicit question is not whether the perception of the other group is right or wrong but rater How did these perceptions occur? What actions on the part of our group may have contributed to this set of perceptions? 8. When the two groups have worked through the discrepancies, as well as the areas of common agreement, they meet to share both the identified discrepancies and their problem-solving approaches to those discrepancies. Because the primary focus is on the behavior underlying the perceptions, free, open discussion is encouraged between the two groups, and their joint aim is to develop an overall list of remaining and possible sources of friction and isolation. 9. The two groups are asked to develop specific plans of action for solving specific problems and for improving their relationships. 10. When the two groups have gone as far as possible in formulating action plans, at least one follow-up meeting is scheduled so that the groups can report on actions that have been implemented, identify any further problems that have emerged, and, where necessary, formulate additional action plans. B.2 Results of Intergroup Conflict Interventions A number of studies have been done on the effects of intergroup conflict resolution. In his original study, Blake reported vastly improved relationships between the union and management. In later study, Bennis used Blakes basic design to improve relationships between two groups of U.S State Department officials-high-level administrative officers and officers in foreign service. Initially, there was much mutual distrust, negative stereotyping, blocked communications, and hostility between the two groups. Each side perceived the other as more threatening than any realistic overseas enemy. Although no hard data were obtained, the intervention seemed to improved relationships so that the two groups at least understood the other sides point of view.

VII. Third Party-Peacemaking Interventions

A. Third-Party Interventions

By: Armand Salangguit

Third-party intervention focuses on conflicts arising between two or more people within the same organization. Conflict is inherent in groups and organizations and can arise from a variety of sources, include differences in personality, task orientation, and perceptions among group members, as well as competition for scarce resources. Conflict can enhance motivation and innovation and lead to greater understanding of ideas and views. On the other hand, it can prevent people from working together constructively, destroying necessary task interactions among group members.

Third-party intervention varies considerably depending on the kind of issues underlying the conflict. Conflict can arise over substantive issues, such as work methods, pay rates, and conditions of employment; or it can emerge from interpersonal issues, such as personalities and misperceptions.

When applied to substantive issues, conflict resolution interventions often involve resolving labor-management disputes through arbitration and mediation. The methods used in such substantive interventions require considerable training and expertise in law and labor relations and generally are not considered part of OD practice. When conflict involves

interpersonal issues, however, OD has developed approaches that help control and resolve it. These third-party interventions help the parties interact with each other directly, facilitating their diagnosis of the conflict and how to resolve it. That ability to facilitate conflict resolution is a basic skill in OD and applies to all of the process interventions.

B. An Episodic Model of Conflict:

Interpersonal conflict often occurs in iterative, cyclical stages known as "episodes." An episodic model is shown in Figure 39. At times, issues underlying a conflict are latent and do not

present any manifest problems for the parties. Then something triggers the conflict and brings it into the open. For example, a violent disagreement or frank confrontation can unleash conflictual behavior. Because of the negative consequences of that behavior, the unresolved disagreement usually becomes latent again. And again, something triggers the conflict, making it overt, and so the cycle continues with the next conflict episode.

Conflict has both costs and benefits to the antagonists and to those in contact with them. Unresolved conflict can proliferate and expand. An interpersonal conflict may be concealed under a cause or issue that serves to make the conflict appear more legitimate. Frequently, the overt conflict is only a symptom of a deeper problem. The episode model identifies four strategies for conflict resolution. The first three attempts to control the conflict and only the last approach try to change the basic issues underlying it.

The first strategy is to prevent the ignition of conflict by arriving at a clear understanding of the triggering factors and there after avoiding or blunting them when the symptoms occur. For example, if conflict between the research and production managers is always triggered by new product introductions, then senior management can warn them that conflict will not be tolerated during the introduction of the latest new product. However this approach may not always be functional and merely may drive the conflict underground until it explodes. As a control strategy, however, this method may help to achieve a temporary cooling-off period.

The second control strategy is to set limits on the form of the conflict. Conflict can be constrained by informal gatherings before a formal meeting or by exploration of other options. It also can be limited by setting rules and procedures specifying the conditions under which the parties can interact. For example, a rule can be instituted that union officials can attempt to resolve grievances with management only at weekly grievance meetings. The third control strategy is to help the parties cope differently with the consequences of the conflict. The third-party consultant may work with the people involved to devise coping techniques, such as reducing their dependence on the relationship, ventilating their feelings to friends, and developing additional sources of emotional support. These methods can reduce the costs of the conflict without resolving the underlying issues.

The fourth method is an attempt to eliminate or to resolve the basic issues causing the conflict. As Walton points out, "There is little too he said about this objective because it is the most obvious and straightforward, although it is often the most difficult to achieve."

C. Facilitating the Conflict Resolution Process:

Walton has identified a number of factors and tactical choices that can facilitate the use of the episode model in resolving the underlying causes of conflict. The following ingredients can help third-party consultants achieve productive dialogue between the disputants so that they examine their differences and change their perceptions and behaviors: mutual motivation to resolve the conflict; equality of power between the parties; coordinated attempts to confront the conflict; relevant phasing of the stages of identifying differences and of searching for integrative solutions; open and clear forms of communication; and productive levels of tension and stress.

Among the tactical choices identified by Walton do those having to do with diagnosis, the context of the third-party intervention, and the role of the consultant. One of the tactics in third-party intervention is the gathering of data, usually through preliminary interviewing. Group-process observations can also be used. Data gathering provides some understanding of the nature and the type of conflict, the personality and conflict styles of the individuals involved, the issues and attendant pressures, and the participants' readiness to work together to resolve the conflict. The context in which the intervention occurs is also important. Consideration of the neutrality of the meeting area, the formality of the setting, the appropriateness of the time for the meeting (that is, a meeting should not be started until a time has been agreed on to conclude or adjourn), and the careful selection of those who should attend the meeting are all elements of this context. In addition, the third-party consultant must decide on an appropriate role to assume in resolving conflict. The specific tactic chosen will depend on the diagnosis of the situation. For example, facilitating dialogue of interpersonal issues might include initiating the agenda for the meeting, acting as a referee during the meeting, reflecting and restating the issues and the differing perceptions of the individuals involved, giving feedback and receiving comments on

the feedback, helping the individuals diagnose the issues in the conflict, providing suggestions or recommendations, and helping the parties do a better job of diagnosing the underlying problem. The third-party consultant must develop considerable skill at diagnosis, intervention, and follow-up. The third-party intervener must be highly sensitive to his or her own feelings and to those of others. He or she also must recognize that some tension and conflict are inevitable and that although there can be an optimum amount and degree of conflict, too much conflict can be dysfunctional for both the people involved and the larger organization. The third-party consultant must be sensitive to the situation and able to use a number of different intervention strategies and tactics when intervention appears to be useful. Finally, she or he must have professional expertise in third-party intervention and must be seen by the parties as neutral or unbiased regarding the issues and outcomes of the conflict resolution.

VIII. Organizational Mirror Intervention

A. Organization Mirror Interventions

By: Laila Dela Cruz

The organization mirror is a set of activities in which a particular organizational group gets feedback from representatives from several other organizational groups about how it is perceived and regarded. This intervention is designed to improve the relationships between groups and increase the intergroup work effectiveness. It is different from the intergroup team building intervention in that three or more groups are involved, representatives of other workrelated groups typically participate rather than the full membership, and the focus is to assist the unit that requested the meeting.

B. Partnering Partnering is a variation of team building and strategic planning having the objective of forming an effective problem-finding/problem-solving management team composed of personnel of both parties, thus creating a single culture with one set of goals and objectives for the project.

IX. INTERPERSONAL INTERVENTIONS A. Behavior Modeling

Behavior Modeling is a training technique designed to improve interpersonal competence. It is not an OD intervention but we believe I should be added to practitioners repertoire because it is such an effective tool, and because problems with interpersonal relations are common in organizations. For improving interpersonal skills, behavior modeling is an important training option. A simple problem-solving model underlies most behavior modeling training. The problem solving approach consists of three phases-problem identification, problem solving and implementation, consisted of five behavioral skills. 1. Behavior description. The ability to describe behavior of self or others in specific concrete terms and to avoid generalizations or inferences drawn from observed behaviors. 2. Justification. The ability to clearly explain the impact of an observed behavior on the individual, the observer or the organization. 3. Active listening. The ability to accurately reflect both content and feelings of anothers communication. 4. Participative problem solving. The ability to involve another, meaningfully and appropriately, in the process of solving a work-related problem. 5. Positive reinforcement. The ability to compliment another in sincere and authentic manner.

B. Life and Career Planning Life and career planning workshops are less process oriented than T-group experiences, and they emphasize individual examination of personal career and life plans and then discussion of individuals analyses and plans in small groups.

C. Coaching and Mentoring These activities frequently grow out of team-building and intergroup interventions. The OD consultant can be in a position to provide guidance for formal mentoring programs while coaching by an employees immediate superior focuses on job performance.

D. Mentoring and Coaching Skills D.1 Mentoring: Create an open and supportive climate for discussion.

Demonstrate good listening/follow-up skills. Provide constructive feedback and advice.

D. 2 Coaching: Simple Process Preparation Discussion Active Coaching Follow-up

X. Large Group Interventions XI. Role Theory

A. Role theory

By: Vanessa Esperanza Papna

By: Benigay Charlie Ann S.

Role theory is a perspective in sociology and in social psychology that considers most of everyday activity to be the acting out of socially defined categories (e.g., mother, manager, and teacher). Each social role is a set of rights, duties, expectations, norms and behaviors that a person has to face and fulfill. The model is based on the observation that people behave in a predictable way, and that an individuals behavior is context specific, based on social position and other factors. The theatre is a metaphor often used to describe role theory. Although the word role (or roll) has existed in European languages for centuries, as a sociological concept, the term has only been around since the 1920s and 1930s. It became more prominent in sociological discourse through the theoretical works of George Herbert Mead, Jacob L. Moreno, and Linton. Two of Meads concepts the mind and the self are the precursors to role theory. Depending on the general perspective of the theoretical tradition, there are many types of role theory. The theory posits the following:

B. Propositions about Social Behavior

1. The division of labor in society takes the form of the interaction among heterogeneous specialized positions that we call roles; 2. Social roles included "appropriate" and "permitted" forms of behavior, guided by social norms, which are commonly known and hence determine expectations; 3. Roles are occupied by individuals, who are called "actors"; 4. When individuals approve of a social role (i.e., they consider the role "legitimate" and "constructive"), they will incur costs to conform to role norms, and will also incur costs to punish those who violate role norms; 5. Changed conditions can render a social role outdated or illegitimate, in which case social pressures are likely to lead to role change; 6. The anticipation of rewards and punishments, as well as the satisfaction of behaving in a prosocial way, account for why agents conform to role requirements.

In terms of differences among role theory, on one side there is a more functional perspective, which can be contrasted with the more micro level approach of the symbolic interactionist tradition. This type of role theory dictates how closely related individuals actions are to the society, as well as how empirically testable a particular role theory perspective may be.

A key insight of this theory is that role conflict occurs when a person is expected to simultaneously act out multiple roles that carry contradictory expectations. Substantial debate exists in the field over the meaning of the "role" in role theory. A role can be defined as a social position, behavior associated with a social position, or a typical behavior. Some theorists have put forward the idea that roles are essentially expectations about how an individual ought to behave in a given situation, while others consider it means how individuals actually behave in a given social position. Others have suggested that a role is a characteristic behavior or expected behavior, a part to be played, or a script for social conduct. In sociology there are different categories of social roles: 1. Cultural roles: roles given by culture (e.g. priest) 2. Social differentiation: e.g. teacher, taxi driver 3. situation-specific roles: e.g. eye witness

4. bio-sociological roles: e.g. as human in a natural system 5. Gender roles: as a man, woman, mother, father, etc.

In their life people have to face different social roles, sometimes they have to face different roles at the same time in different social situations. There is an evolution of social roles: some disappear and some new develop. Role behavior is influenced by following aspects:

1. 2. 3.

The norms, determining a social situation. Internal and external expectations are connected to a social role. Social sanctions and rewards are used to influence role behavior.

These three aspects are used to evaluate the own behavior and the behavior of other people. Heinrich Popitz defines social roles as norms of behavior a special social group has to follow. Norms of behavior are a set of behavior that is usually used by the group members, in case of deviance, negative sanctions follow.

C. Category of Social Roles Cultural roles Cultural roles are seen as matter of course and are mostly stable. In cultural changes new roles can develop and old roles can disappear these cultural changes are affected by political and social conflicts. For example the feminist movement initiated a change in male and female roles in Western societies. Social differentiation Social differentiation got a lot of attention due to the development of different job roles. Robert K. Merton distinguished between intrapersonal and interpersonal role conflicts. For example, a foreman has to develop his own social role facing the expectations of his team members and his supervisor this is an interpersonal role conflict. He also has to arrange his different social roles as father, husband, club member this is an intrapersonal role conflict.

Ralph Dahrendorf distinguished between must-expectations, with sanctions; shall-expectations, with sanctions and rewards and can-expectations, with rewards. The foreman has to avoid corruption; he should satisfy his reference groups (e.g. team members and supervisors); and he can be sympathetic. He argues another proponent of role theory is that people accept their own roles in the society and it is not the society that imposes them. Situation-specific roles Situation-specific roles develop ad hoc in a given social situation. Nevertheless the expectations and norms are predetermined by the social role. Bio-sociological Roles Bio-sociology is the study of the evolution of social forms and the development of social behavior in terms analogous to or correlated with biological studies. Bio-sociological role is the scientific study of the interrelationships of social species and their relationships with the environment, the study of biological and social factors' relations. Gender Roles A gender role is a set of social and behavioral norms that are generally considered appropriate for either a man or a woman in a social or interpersonal relationship. There are differences of opinion as to which observed differences in behavior and personality between genders are entirely due to innate personality of the person and which are due to cultural or social factors, and are therefore the product of socialization, or to what extent gender differences are due to biological and physiological differences.

Gender roles differ according to cultural-historical context, and while most cultures express two genders, some express more. Androgyny, for example, has been proposed as a third gender. Others societies have been claimed to have more than five genders, and some nonWestern societies have three genders man, woman and third gender. Gender expression refers to the external manifestation of one's gender identity, through "masculine," "feminine or gendervariant or gender neutral behavior, clothing, hairstyles, or body characteristics.

D. Additional Concepts

Role Theory has been a fruitful approach to understanding humans and society. As a result, various derivatives and additional concepts have developed. Role Confusion Role confusion is a situation where an individual has trouble determining which role he/she should assume. For example, if a graduate student were to attend a department party at a professor's home, the student may find it difficult to determine if he/she should act as a student toward the professor, exhibiting deference or respect, or as a friend or associate, showing collegiality and familiarity. Role Conflict Role Conflict results when an individual encounters tensions as the result of incompatible roles. For instance, a mother who is employed full-time may experience role conflict because of the norms that are associated with the two roles she has. She may be expected to spend a great deal of time taking care of her children while simultaneously trying to advance her career. Role Strain

Role Strain refers to the felt difficulty in fulfilling role obligations. In contrast to role conflict, where tension is felt between two competing roles, the tension in role strain comes from just one role. Returning to the example of a mother, if she were to find that she is unable to fulfill her obligations as defined by, say, an overly demanding spouse (or religion, or child), she would experience role strain. The role expectations may be beyond what she is able to achieve or may push her to the limits of her abilities. Role Distance

Role Distance is the effectively expressed pointed separateness between the individual and his putative role. The individual is not denying the role but the virtual self that is implied in

the role for all accepting performers. The concept of role distance provides a sociological means of dealing with one type of divergence between obligation and actual performance. For example, the maturing adolescent who is forced to ride a merry-go-round may display role distance by acting as though the ride does not challenge her physical abilities or frighten her. This may be displayed by riding backwards or leaning dangerously from her horse.

Immediate audiences figure very directly in the display of role distance; actors need an audience or a co-conspirator for role distancing to work. There are two ways of establishing role distance: 1. Isolating one's self from the contamination of the situation, which can be displayed through indifference (e.g., a waiter saying, "I'm just doing this to put myself through college.") 2. Joking about the situation (e.g., the young merry-go-round rider saying, "I can do this with my eyes closed.")

It is often possible to determine incidents in which role distance might be displayed solely on the grounds of the performers' gross age-sex characteristics. A seventeen year-old boy riding a merry-go-round (especially with peers) will likely display significant role distance. Role Embracement

Role Embracement refers to the complete adoption of a role. When a role is truly embraced, the self disappears completely into the role. Three things seem to be involved in the earnestness with which people assume roles or the degree to which they embrace a role: 1. an admitted or expressed attachment to the role 2. a demonstration of qualifications and capacities for performing it 3. an active engagement or spontaneous involvement in the role activity at hand, that is, a visible investment of attention and muscular effort