„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

obviously, involves the degree to which the supervisor is threatened by the loss of
power.
Peer Group/Intergroup
Similar concerns with the effect of the supervisor in the feedback meeting have led to
the development and testing of another approach, the peer-group/intergroup design
(Alderfer & Holbrook, 1973; Heller, 1970). In this design, groups of peers (people at the
same organizational level) review the data separately. Subordinates in one group
therefore work with the data in the absence of their supervisor. At the same time,
however, the supervisor works with the data in his or her peer group (other supervisors
at the same level). After working in peer groups, with consultative help, the groups are
brought together to share perceptions and to work on problems. Again the process of
using the data and working on potentially threatening issues is initiated in the relatively
safer peer environment and only later moved to the meeting with superiors. The final
stage is essentially an intergroup conflict-resolution meeting, with the groups arrayed
along a vertical dimension, one group being the subordinate of another group.
This design makes use of parts of existing work units and new work units (new peer
groups). Feedback is provided simultaneously to several levels of the organization. A
consultant who is external to the system is usually used. Such a design is best employed
to work on general issues of authority, control, participation, and communication within
the hierarchy. Moving out of family groups and into larger groups allows a more general
consideration of these issues as they affect the whole organization or a portion of the
organization, rather than a focus on issues just within one work unit. Moving out of
family groups provides a safer environment for dealing with issues of authority, but
some external force (that is, the consultant) is needed to make sure that the learnings and
practices coming out of the intergroup sessions are supported and integrated into
ongoing patterns of behavior.
Intergroup
Although not exclusively a feedback approach, the intergroup confrontation meetings
proposed by Beckhard (1969) are applicable. Data concerning the relations between two
or more groups are collected by various means—a questionnaire, an individual
interview, or a direct group interview. Included in these data are one group’s perceptions
of another group, which are then fed back to the other group as a way of initiating a
discussion of the conflicts, tensions, and common interests that exist between the
groups.
As with the peer-group/intergroup design, this approach makes use of both existing
work units and new work units. Feedback is provided simultaneously to different parts
of the organization, and an external consultant is usually involved. Here the focus of the
design is on the relations that exist between different work units but generally does not
involve questions of authority or control, as the two work units or groups are not in a
direct authority relationship with each other. Such a design is best to work on issues of
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 6, 2nd Edition. Copyright ©1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 207