a mutual recognition, dialogue and decision-making, motivation and efficiency, the control and the organisation. According to L. V. Kartashovoj, Т. V. Nikonovoj and Т. O. Solomanidinoj, such stages five: an initial stage of formation, a stage of the intragroup conflict, maintenance of unity of group, a stage of the highest working capacity and a final stage (for time groups). Е. G. Moll, as well as the American scientists, allocates also 4 stages: group formation, a stage a storm and a storm, an execution stage. A lack of all these definitions is their some randomness, absence of methodological criterion. At the heart of authors model the concept based on processes which define features of development of each group lies. These processes, in the conventional opinion of psychologists, are that: adaptation, identification, integration and communications. Adaptation characterises the initial stage of formation of group when its members learn and accept each other, form problems, develop norms of behaviour when start to be shown structure, hierarchy, the status, roles, leadership. Identification is connected with formation of feeling of an accessory of the individual to group. This process proceeds at three levels: the emotional as ability to empathize.
How ability to become on the point of view of other person or all group and behavioural? As aspiration to obey to developing group norms. Integration marks itself a stage when the race for power in group is already finished, group norms, roles of everyone that is when association of individuals has turned to individual collective are finalised. Integration leads to transformation of collective into the self-regulated social organism well adapted for in common-individual activity. For the given stage of development of group following signs are characteristic: the purposes are accurately designated; compatibility of individuals in group is reached; the leader of group has proved the right to leadership in practice; the group successfully carries out the problems put before it; the size of group allows to know opinion of its each member and to estimate it. People feel the accessory to group, hang together, overcoming in common difficulties and solving group problems. Conflicts and the stresses shown at the beginning it is especially frequent and painful, arise all less often and are resolved in the most sparing ways with participation of all group. An indicator of efficiency of integration is degree of unity of group. The highest unity is inherent in group at a step of its maturity. Group disintegration begins with dissociation display between its members. Thus, if to follow logic of development of group and those processes which accompany it, it is possible to allocate following stages:
Thus it is necessary to notice that these stages are not the forms of evolution of group isolated from each other. They only specify in dominating tendencies which define its this or that life cycle. In a life all is more difficult. Happens that processes and adaptations, both identifications, and integration occur simultaneously.
And happens and so that, having reached integration level, the group passes to lower step because in it there was a new leader or its problems have changed. As to communications process it accompanies group development at all its stages. Communications are means with which help members of group co-operate, communicate, build the relations, form group characteristics, operate the behaviour. Therefore about it we will talk separately. Generalising told, it is possible to present schematically model of formation and group development.
According to this model we will consider the basic characteristics of group and potential end results of its activity. Group structure. Each group has the structure. It depends on type of group, its size and structure, mutual relations and norms in it, the status and a role of each member of group. The size and group structure. One of the important factors who in many respects defines efficiency of group, its size is. Practice shows that the groups consisting of 5-9 persons appear the most productive. Such number allows to consider, first, at decision-making different opinions, secondly, creates a transparency at which the contribution of everyone is well visible and, thirdly, provides favorable conditions for interaction and unity. Efficiency of group depends also on its structure. Researches have confirmed such law: than more than the general signs at group (on age, qualification, sights etc.) As that its members more fruitfully work, faster they find that correct decisions of questions which before them arise. At the same time group heterogeneity on what or to a sign under certain conditions can be a source of conflicts. The status. It is accepted to understand a place of the person as the status in a society or group. Distinguish are formal also the informal status. Formal it is defined by a post, an official rank. For example, the professor or the winner of competition? The best by a trade?; the informal? Personal qualities of the person and a recognition people of these qualities. If the established group status corresponds to expectations of the person, the person recognises group norms and behaves according to them if is not present, between the person and group there is a conflict role a role. It is a way or model of behaviour of the person in this or that situation. Each member of group carries out certain roles which depend on its status. Complexity of management of organizational behaviour here consists that in a life people simultaneously carry out some roles. The person at the same time can be the head subordinated, a companion, the parent etc. In each role from it expect certain behaviour. When the member of group does not justify group expectations, there is a role conflict. There are different role conflicts:
1. The conflict the person - a role. It arises when the role requirement breaks the basic values of the individual or its requirement. For example, the person can leave group if its representations about morals or justice disperse from group opinion.
2. The conflict in a role. Such conflict appears when the person appears as though between the devil and the deep sea. On the one hand, for example, the head of group on office hierarchy belongs to the heads and should behave according to position; with another, it the member of group also wishes to keep with it friendly relations.
3. The conflict between roles. In its basis contradictions between expectations from those roles which are carried out by the person lie. In particular, the rallied group which purposes do not coincide with the purposes of the formal organisation, can become the reason of the interrole conflict for its members.
Researches show what to avoid role conflicts difficultly. However it is possible to minimise their negative influence on new groups. For this purpose it is necessary to know the reasons of occurrence of contradictions and in due time to interfere with process of their development. Norms. It is accepted to understand the conventional standards which have developed in group as a result of long interaction of its members as group norms. Unlike role expectations which are turned to separate people, norms are turned at once to all members of group. Both formal, and informal groups can have various hand-written or unwritten norms. One of them are formalized in various written documents. Others officially do not appear, nevertheless become known to all members of group. And though they have informal character, their influence on mutual relations in group and efficiency of its work often appears more strongly written norms.
The basic norms can be reduced to several types:
What define norms of activity, its productivity, quality, terms of performance of tasks etc.
Concern the first type. To the second the norms connected with distribution of resources. They regulate an order of assignment for wages, encouragements, sequence of granting of privileges and privileges etc.
To the third the norms, concerning informal social agreements. The rules regulating display of professional or group solidarity, admissible limits of sanctions to separate members of group, norm of group loyalty etc.
Here enter. The fourth type is formed by organizational norms. It can be requirements to clothes of the workers, shown for maintenance of certain image of firm, or standards at negotiating etc. Existence of norms is dictated by a problem of achievement of the purposes of group. Association of efforts of members of group demands some compulsion. Necessity of such compulsion is shown the more strongly, than the requirement for uniformity of behaviour is more sharply felt at the decision of questions of joint activity of group. Value of norms is difficult for overestimating. First, they promote predictability of behaviour of members of groups, reduction of quantity of interpersonal problems and conflicts. Secondly, norms allow people to define the value of the group distinguishing it others, and on this basis to construct model of own behaviour. Thirdly, influence formation of unity of group unity. The unity concept has great value for understanding of a role of group in the organisation. This role can be either positive, or negative, all depends on that, the group purposes coincide with the purposes of the organisation or not. In the first case members of group cultivate the best business and moral qualities, are proud of an accessory to the collective. All it together promotes that arising problems dare efficiently, creatively, taking into account the general opinion.
In the second case on the first place in a group life intergroup conflic