Government, business, and volunteer organizations rely heavily on committee meetings as a mode of problem solving and decision making. Unfortunately, in such task-oriented groups, the leader's at tempts to mobilize the group resources are frequently frustrated by an unproductive group process. There are incidents in which the process is deliberately sabotaged by its members, although this is generally the exception. The more frequent cause of counterproductive interaction is that the members do not feel "safe" enough to voice suggestions and concerns, because they may fear ridicule, negative judgments, or even retaliation. Sometimes the problem process is a consequence of a covert or unstated norm. For example, socializing in meetings is difficult to stop because socializing has become the expected norm. Most frequently, however, the members and leader simply do not know how to foster group processes that promote task accomplishment. Thus, the development of this important dynamic is left to chance and, as often as not, counterproductive processes become entrenched. It goes without saying that it is the leader's responsibility to orchestrate the transition from a collection of individuals to an effective problem-solving group. Thus, facilitating productive group processes is a major concern for all committee leaders.
A wealth of data from the group dynamics social-psychological literature attests to the powerful impact of a group environment on its members. An environment that fosters trust is an important precondition to effective group functioning. If members feel mistrustful of each other or of the leader, they will not be inclined to share their opinions and ideas openly or to offer feedback to others. Trust and Openness are essential ingredients for the development of cohesiveness.
Studies of group dynamics have demonstrated that the members of highly cohesive groups can be more influenced by each other. Cooperation among members is one manifestation of cohesiveness. Researchers have found that groups ranked high in cooperative actions demonstrated more solutions to problems, acted in more positive ways with each other, and reported fewer communication problems than did members of less cooperative groups. Although cohesiveness is a tremendous facilitator, it alone does not guarantee a problem-solving focus. In fact, the cohesiveness might inhibit problem solving if the group develops a subtle anti-task bond.
Since trust, openness, and cohesiveness are necessary conditions for the productive functioning of task-oriented groups, the difficult question becomes what actions you as a leader take to facilitate the development of these elusive processes. Recent developments in the behavioral approach to groups offer specific techniques.
Laying the Foundation: The Leader's Preparatory Actions
To be an effective leader you must take action to facilitate the committee's productivity before the first session and during each sub sequent session. However, before discussing these preparatory actions, it is important to specify several basic assumptions:
- The current environment influences what people do in the group.
- Each member and the leader are part of the environment of the other members.
- The current environment can be changed by the actions of the members and of the leader.
- All member and leader behavior is potentially measurable-that is, data can be gathered on the behavior of members and of the leader, as well as on the group process.
- Member and leader actions and interactions are susceptible to change by behavioral methods.
- A committee meeting can be viewed as an educational process where teaching and learning take place, as well as a work process where problems are solved and decisions are made.
- Committees should set clear goals and clear objectives for reaching the goals.
Setting the “Meta-goal”
A basic question confronting all potential committee leaders is, "Is a group effort necessary for solving the problem of concern, or might it be more effectively handled by a single individual?" A problem such as identifying what factors caused a drop in sales last year can only be answered by investigation, and is probably most efficiently pursued by an individual. By contrast, the problem of determining which marketing strategy to adopt for the next fiscal year requires a creative solution based on a blending of expert opinion and prediction. Here a group approach would probably be most efficient.
A second basic question concerns the committee's power to act on the decisions it makes. When decisions and solutions have little feasibility of being implemented, then the committee's efforts become academic. Few companies have the resources to explore interesting but basically unfeasible solutions. In short, your first task is to identify a real problem that is potentially solvable and to determine whether it is best pursued individually or with a group.
Translate the purpose of the committee into a "meta-goal." A meta-goal is a statement of the overall goal or purpose for the existence of the committee. When the meta-goal is reached, there is no further reason for the committee to continue meeting. The meta-goal defines the focus of the committee-the performance area to which each member contributes. A specific and explicit statement of the meta-goal is crucial; confusion and ambiguity about general goals of a committee often cause frustration and failure.
Group process research has demonstrated that members who have a clear picture of the group goal and the path to accomplishing it typically like their own task and the group task more, experience less hostile feelings toward the group, and are more responsive to group influence than persons in groups in which goals and means are unclear. A meta-goal such as "to open communication channels among departments" is too vague to suggest a concrete direction for the committee, because members are likely to have divergent ideas of what is meant. The committee can become frustrated just in the attempt to come to an agreement as to its actual purpose. A more productive meta-goal might be "to develop and implement a procedure for coordinating the goals and functioning of research and development, accounting, marketing, and production." Determining the meta-goal must be accomplished before you can determine who should participate in the committee.
Selecting Members
The degree of control allotted to leaders in selecting members of task groups varies greatly. When membership is predetermined by job position, as in an executive staff meeting, leaders of course have virtually no determining power. In fact, leaders may hold a position simply because assuming the leadership role is part of their job responsibilities.
In committees formed to handle a specific problem, leaders generally have more latitude in selecting members. A major reason for employing a group approach is the wider range of skills and areas of expertise available to the problem-solving process. Much in the same way as selecting a new employee, you should strive to find the best match between the skills required to solve the problem (reach the meta-goal) and the skills of the prospective members. Attempt to select a group that collectively has the skills needed to solve the specific problem.
A requirement that seems obvious-but that is often not considered-is that members must be able to participate fully in the group. Other responsibilities should not make it difficult to attend meetings and to carry out between-session tasks. Equally important is that members should want to join the committee. When you select members who find the committee a burden, or who do not want to participate for other reasons, then you have a problem. The relative status and power among members is another important consideration.
When there is a power disparity, there exists the potential for the development of second-class citizenship. The more powerful members generally tend to dominate, whereas the less powerful tend to agree or simply to not participate at all. Therefore, whenever possible, select members who have equal status.
