Michigan State University Extension
Boardsmanship - 12280001
06/05/00
Studies in Group Leadership The Process of Evaluation Ways To Assess "How Are We Doing?"
List of files and visuals associated with this text.
Extension Bulletin E-1228 August 1978
(Fil. 3) Text in PDF version
Prepared by Maxine Ferris, Specialist in Staff
Development and Training.
Many organizations have been around for five, ten, or
even twenty years. Some still have a fairly stable
membership. It is reasonable to ask, "How are these
groups doing?" "How have they matured and improved? "Have
they benefitted from past experiences?" "Are they still
evolving, developing?
"What is the health of your organization?
Is Your Group Mature?
Some years ago, Sociologist Franklyn Haiman, put forth
the notion that groups, like people, can and should go
through a developmental process. His criteria of maturity
provide a tool for examining the developmental age of
groups.
In "infancy," groups tend to be disorganized and very
dependent upon their leaders. In "adolescence," members
struggle to gain more independence and do more for
themselves. The "mature" group can handle problems, make
intelligent decisions and work productively.
Haiman's criteria are an excellent vehicle for self-
appraisal. According to Haiman, a mature group:
1. Has a clear understanding of its purposes or goals.
2. Makes progress toward its goals with maximum
efficiency, and minimum wasted effort.
3. Is able to look ahead and plan ahead.
4. Has achieved effective intercommunication.
5. Can initiate and carry on effective, logical problem
solving.
6. Has achieved an appropriate balance between established
ways of working together and readiness to change.
7. Is objective about its own functioning; can face its
procedural-emotional problems and intelligently make
needed modifications.
8. Strikes an appropriate balance between group
productivity (socio-group functions) and the satisfaction
of ego need (psyche-group functions).
9. Provides for the diffusion and sharing of leadership.
10. Achieves an appropriate balance between content and
process in group actions.
11. Is highly cohesive but not exclusive or to the point of
stifling individuality.
12. Makes intelligent use of the differing abilities of
its members.
13. Faces reality, and works on the basis of fact rather
than fantasy.
14. Provides an atmosphere of psychological freedom for
the expression of all feelings and points of view.
15. Is not over-dominated by its leader or any members.
16. Has achieved a healthy balance between cooperative
and competitive behavior of members.
17. Strikes an appropriate balance between emotionality
and rationality.
18. Can readily change and adapt to the needs of
differing situations.
19. Recognizes that means are inseparable from ends.
20. Recognizes the values and limitations of democratic
procedures.
A group of long-standing that appears to be still "in
diapers" has reason to question its validity and purpose.
Too many groups, instead of having five years experience
working together, have really had the same experience
repeated five times. But it is never too late to start
growing. Regardless of its history, a group can take stock
of its position and plan improvement. It is rewarding for a
group to measure itself against past performance and say,
"See how we've grown and matured this year!"
Other "Yardsticks"
Groups may use other yardsticks besides "maturity" to
evaluate themselves. Several are designed to measure
"accomplishment" in its broadest sense. Assess your group
by asking:
1. How well is this group as a group progressing towards a
goal?
2. How well is this group fitting its immediate goals into
the broader framework of society?
3. How well does this group utilize its members'
potentialities to contribute to its work goals?
4. How well is this group helping its members to become
better contributors, to assume a wider variety of essential
group roles than present potentialities allow them?
5. How well is this group able to work with other groups
who have similar goals?
Is Your Group "Effective?"
Some people find it difficult to assess their group as
"good" or "bad" but can describe specifically what the
group can do. They may find it useful to compare the
behavior of their group with that described by G. McGregor
in his description of an "effective" group.
1. The atmosphere is informal, comfortable, relaxed.
2. There is a lot of discussion; nearly everyone
participates. Discussions stay on the track.
3. Everyone understands and accepts the task or objective
of the group. Free discussion precedes determination of
policy.
4. The members listen to each other. Every idea is given a
hearing. People are not afraid to put forth a creative
thought even if it seems fairly extreme.
5. There are disagreements. These are not suppressed or
overridden by premature group action. Viewpoints get a
fair hearing.
6. Most decisions are reached by a consensus in which it
is clear that everyone is willing to go along. Formal
voting is at a minimum; the group does not accept a simple
majority as a proper basis for action.
7. Criticism is frequent, frank and relatively comfortable.
There is little personal attack, open or hidden.
8. People can express their feelings freely as well as
their ideas, both on the problem and on the group's
operation.
9. When action is taken, clear assignments are made and
accepted.
10. The chairman of the group does not dominate it.
Leadership shifts from time to time, depending upon the
circumstances. There is little evidence of a struggle for
power as the group operates. The issue is not who
controls but how to get the job done.
11. The group is self-conscious of its own operation.
Groups may want to examine particular aspects of their
interactions: leadership, productivity, learning,
discussion process, conflict management, use of time,
format, morale, participation.
The group or its leaders can select the type of evaluation
tool that will produce the desired information. Some people
prefer open-ended questionnaires where respondents can both
describe and evaluate. Others feel more confident using
rating scales, making charts, counting, classifying or
writing narratives. Whenever possible, groups should
consider using several evaluation types.
Although some evaluation tools were designed for use by
professionals, most can be mastered by well-trained
observers, drawn from the membership. It may be desirable
to have the entire membership participate in the evaluating
process. This requires adequate time, usually at the close
of the meeting.
Feedback is imperative. Regardless of the method selected,
it is important that members who participate in evaluation
be aware that some use is being made of their inputs.
Otherwise, they will likely refuse to participate fully in
subsequent evaluation activities.
What's A PMR Sheet?
One popular and simple tool that draws out member feelings
concerning the overall tone and operation of the group is
the Post Meeting Reaction evaluation. A typical PMR sheet
concerns itself with member satisfaction, style of
leadership exhibited, and feelings about opportunities to
participate. See sample PMR sheet.
_________________________________________________________
Post Meeting Reaction Sheet (PMR)
1. How satisfied are you with the RESULTS of the
discussion?
Very Satisfied Moderately Satisfied Dissatisfied
2. How well ORGANIZED and SYSTEMATIC was the discussion?
Disorderly Just Right Too rigid
3. How do you feel about the STYLE OF LEADERSHIP supplied
by the chairperson?
Too autocratic Democratic Weak
4. PREPARATION for the meeting was
Thoroough Adequate Poor
5. Did you find yourself WANTING TO SPEAK when you didn't
get a chance?
Almost never Occasionally Often
6. How do you feel about WORKING AGAIN with this same
group?
Eager I will Reluctant
Comments:
__________________________________________________________
In phrasing your own PMR questions, remember to keep them
specific and probably no more than six or seven in number.
Usually the PMR sheets are not discussed at the time of
their completion. Reporting on the group's reaction is
often a good way to begin the next meeting.
Some leaders, especially those who feel secure and wish
to improve, may request that their behavior be judged by
the members. Rating scales are popular for this purpose.
Members, too, might benefit from a little self-evaluation.
"How well did I participate?" is a question members should
ask.
Why Evaluate?
If evaluation is to be useful, all of the membership should
be aware of its par pose: the improvement of group
functioning and productivity. It is not intended as a
scheme for grading individual members nor placing blame for
pas failures. One would hope that individual members would
benefit from the information derived and attempt to modify
their behavior accordingly; but the real gain should be in
the total functioning of the group.
Since participant behavior may differ during different
segments of the same meeting, it may be helpful to do
comparative evaluation during a given meeting, noting
quantity and quality of participation during different
parts of the discussion. Knowing that certain individuals
come on strong at the start of the discussion and others
participate better later on can be useful information for
the leader. Also, if it becomes apparent that the group
suffers from mid-meeting "blahs," compensatory activities
may be incorporated or a needed break scheduled.
Evaluation can be most useful when:
1. it does not become routine. (Common sense dictates that
it not become an end in itself or be done so often that it
loses impact.)
2. it is handled briskly, objectively, and "without casting
stones."
3. it incorporates the feedback of evaluators or observers
to improve the workings of the group.
4. it is not viewed as a cure-all for all of the group's
problems.
| Visual title - Visual size |
Visual title - Visual size |
This information is for educational purposes only. References
to commercial products or trade names does not imply
endorsement by MSU Extension or bias against those not
mentioned. This information becomes public property upon
publication and may be printed verbatim with credit to MSU
Extension. Reprinting cannot be used to endorse or advertise
a commercial product or company.
This file was generated from data base BD on 06/05/00.
Data base BD was last revised on 06/05/00.
For more information about this data base or its contents please contact
smalley@msue.msu.edu . Please read our
disclaimer for important
information about using our site.