In some cases, intergroup dynamics is prosocial, positive, and beneficial (for example, when multiple research teams work together to accomplish a task or goal). Most people are polite as they try to put their “best foot forward.” The result is a superficial level of harmony and co-operation.

They make take the same organizational department but they are bound together by some other Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1994. members to force them to conform to the group's standards. The two authors concluded that status consensus is more readily achieved in groups where – (a) the group task specialist is perceived to be competent by the membership; (b) a leader emerges who plays a role that is considered an important group task, and (c) a leadership role emerges and is filled by an individual who concentrates on coordinating and maintaining the activities of the group. During the initial stage, the members of the group do not have any clear idea. to become productive and effective. During these stages vi.


(ii) Group dynamics consists of a set of techniques such as role playing, brainstorming, group therapy, sensitivity train­ing etc.

(Adjourning may also be referred to as mourning, i.e. There should be a capable and effective leadership, which reflects in its role in building and maintaining group cohesion. Formal groups may take the form of command ), and affection (do I belong here?). The British psychologist William McDougall in his work The Group Mind (1920) researched the dynamics of groups of various sizes and degrees of organization. Generally, these preconceptions are integral parts of an individual’s personal philosophy. [4] In 1945, he established The Group Dynamics Research Center at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the first institute devoted explicitly to the study of group dynamics. vii. on trust and felt obligation. They are prescriptions for acceptable behaviour determined by a group, institution, or society.”, In the opinion of Argyle, “Group norms are rules or guidelines of accepted behaviour which are established by a group and used to monitor the behaviour of its members.”.

Inadequate development of alternatives, and. These values become a standard of conduct, which is correct from a group as well as from a social vantage point. They further observe that when an individual member’s goals and needs are in conflict with the goals and needs of the overall group, lower levels of membership satisfaction are the result. The aggressor criticizes members' values and The history of group dynamics (or group processes)[2] has a consistent, underlying premise: 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.'