Small group communication principles and dynamics

Small Group Communication

It is often the case that communication that works perfectly well in person - or face-to-face, as we call it now - breaks down when people attempt to translate the same relationships that they have developed directly into cyber-relationships. And herein lies the rub: cyber-relationships are not the same as those we have in person. Once people acknowledge the fact that such relationships are different with different sets of rules (not worse or better, but simply different), then they can adjust their behavior and their expectations to the new form of communication.

Cyber-communication is an unnatural way of maintaining human relationships. We have each been evolutionarily selected to be social animals - and social animals in a very specific way, by being in the physical presence of other humans. This means that while some large percent of our ability to communicate with others is based on the informational aspects of language (which translate quite well to email and chat-rooms), human communication also depends upon tone of voice, facial expression and touch.

Cyber-communication strips away these other aspects of communication, allowing for numerous opportunities for miscommunication and hurt feelings. However, some steps can be taken to remedy these problems. The first is to have a moderator for the group who steps in to remind people of just this fact - that it is easy to misunderstand. Second, the group should have an "anti-flame" policy allowing a member to be blocked from contributing for a day if three or more other members complain. Finally, the group should try to meet in person whenever possible to provide an opportunity to reconnect.

Question Two

As a consultant, I would strongly argue against such a division of a small town. Inevitably (and realizing that the issue of chemical sensitivity is an important one) each of the three groups will not only begin to feel alienated from each other but also begin to feel superior to each other (which latter tendency will be even more divisive). Those who do not wear any scent will consider themselves to be purists. Those who wear a small amount will consider themselves to be level-headed moderates. And those who wear the typical amount will consider themselves to be normal. And each of these groups will consider that it has the most legitimate claim to the moral high ground. If the town decides to divide meetings along these lines it will necessarily suffer a long-standing breakdown in community.

While it might be difficult at first, the best step for the town government to make (if it is in fact dedicated to providing a healthy atmosphere for those who are chemically sensitive) is to ban the wearing of scents at all public meetings. It is a fundamental element of democratic governance that all of the members of a community be able to come together at times, and if there are formal structures preventing this then the community as such no longer exists.

Question Three

Small groups are used in myriads of circumstances: family meetings, PTA committees, city parks commissions, campaign staffs, environmental groups, union steering committees, civil rights commissions, company safety and health committees, R&D division employees, newspaper line editors, staff involved in a single advertising account, birthing class members, marching band members, school play cast members, terrorists in a single cell.

Both members of an environmental group and the members of a union steering committee might want to engage a consultant because members of both groups want to change the status quo and might seek guidance in how to accomplish this difficult task.