Leadership in Groups and Teams 203

3. Emergence phase. At this point the group begins to rally around one solu- tion or decision. Coalitions formed during the second phase disband while dissent and social conflict die out.

4. Reinforcement phase. Consensus develops during the final stage. Interacts are positive in nature, reflecting support for other group members and for the solution that emerged in phase three. Tension is gone, and the group commits itself to implementing the decision.

Not everyone is convinced that groups develop through a single series of phases. For example, Marshall Scott Poole argues that groups go through mul- tiple stages of development.8 Poole suggests that at any given time a group may be at one point in its social development and at another in its task devel- opment. One group might start by proposing solutions and stop later to social- ize, while another group might build relationships before tackling the task. Important moments of change in a group’s development are called breakpoints. These breakpoints can involve naturally occurring topic changes, moments of delay, or, most seriously, disruptions caused by conflict or failure. Consensus about who the leader is will result in fewer delays and disruptions in the group’s decision-making process.

Though scholars may describe the process in different ways, the concept of group evolution has important implications. First, timing is critical. It’s not just what you say, it’s when you say it. A good proposal made too early in the discussion, for instance, may not be accepted. Second, since groups take time to develop successfully, any attempt to rush a group’s development is likely to meet with failure. Third, effective groups are characterized by a high degree of cohesion and commitment. Consensus both speeds the development of groups and is the product of effective group interaction. Finally, the evolution of groups suggests that group leadership also develops in stages or as a process.

Emergent Leadership Ernest Bormann and others at the University of Minnesota studied emer-

gent or “natural” leadership in small groups.9 The researchers found that the group selects its leader by the method of residues. Instead of choosing a leader immediately, the group eliminates leader contenders until only one person is left. This procedure is similar to what happens in the presidential primary sys- tem. Many candidates begin the race for their party’s presidential nomination; gradually the field shrinks as challengers lose primaries, run out of money, get caught in ethics violations, and so forth. Eventually, only one candidate remains. This same principle of selection by elimination operates in the small group. Although all members enter the group as potential leaders, contenders are disqualified until only one leader emerges.

According to Bormann and others, the elimination of potential leaders occurs in two phases. In the first phase, those deemed unsuitable for leader- ship are quickly removed from contention. Unsuitable candidates may be too quiet or they may be too rigid and aggressive. Many would-be leaders stumble because they appear to be unintelligent and uninformed. Once these cuts have

Hackman-Johnson 6E.book Page 203 Tuesday, March 12, 2013 12:54 PM

204 Chapter Seven

been made, the group then enters the second phase. At this point, about half the group is still actively contending for leadership. Social relations are often tense during this stage. behaviors that lead to elimination in phase two include dominating other group members and talking too much. Such factors as social standing outside the group may be used to eliminate other aspiring leaders.