„‚ CONDITIONS THAT HINDER EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION

present as varied a support for his or her opinions or proposals as can be mustered. This
represents a significant shift in the basis for verification, from “authority” (based on the
personal opinion of a person in a position of relative power) to “plausibility”’ (based on
the consensual validation of others). From another standpoint, this shift may be said to
represent the beginning of a movement from legitimate power, based on institutional
position, to competence power, based on group participation and the pooled expertise of
group members.
As conflict accelerates, the psychological safety of the individual person becomes
increasingly precarious. This is particularly true for T-groups, which are likely to
include some members with strong needs for psychological safety. In the terminology of
Bion (1974), those members are regularly shifting from fight to flight. They change the
subject, make a joke, call for a recess, or provide overly rational analyses of problems.
Such acts temporarily relieve tension, and the resulting relief allows for some relaxation
in the defensive posture of the opponents. In turn, this relaxation may extend the
receptivity of the opponents so that each becomes aware of the divergent ideas of others.
Through pairing and improved dyadic relations, others in the T-group may lay a
foundation for enlarging the pair to a generalized other, such as the total T-group.
Finally, using Bion’s last type of reaction to a group, dependency, we see that some
people may become counter-dependent by holding the group at bay and adjusting to the
group by being devil’s advocates. Such people are typically more devil than advocate,
but they serve the useful function of strengthening the solidarity of the group and its
adherence to shared norms.
Continuing conflict requires that each opponent interfere with the outcomes of
others and be prepared to pay the costs in time, energy, and the utilization of resources.
In the most extreme and durable manifestation of conflict, the opponents invest more
energy in reducing the outcome of others than in increasing their own outcomes. In this
case, the total outcome is a negative win-lose situation. Protracted internecine conflict is
limited by how long the opponents can continue to suffer losses. The costs of such
conflicts ultimately become the primary limiting factor.
As the costs of conflict mount, collective outcomes are reduced, the group
experiences little or no progress, and breaks appear in the vicious cycle of mutual attack.
As breaks in the conflict appear in a T-group, for example, a few members offer succor
to one another, support an opinion or action or proposal, and even endorse the selfdisclosure
involved in the active fight behavior of the more aggressive opponents. These
forms of support may provide the beginning of a shared regard, a recognition of the
wide range of divergent ideas, an extension of the resources that are potentially
complementary and reciprocal, and the awareness that varied and complex resources are
needed. The extended repertoire of explicit resources is brought into active
consideration; commitments to old ways of relating are less tenable; and conditions for
the modification of all relations are now favorable. Accommodation appears, at first in
awkward fragments, then in coordinated actions, and finally in consensually validated
settlements (Glidewell, 1975).
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 6, 2nd Edition. Copyright ©1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 377