Small groups that are rigidly organized and in equilibrium often seem dead. A high emphasis on stability, on “not rocking the boat,” leads to a group that does not change, learn, and grow. As a group moves toward disorder, rules become less important and feedback increases because the relations between members, and relations between members and the group as a whole, become more dynamic. Stacey calls the situation “messy,” and this is often an apt description. This is the phase in which group membership becomes more rewarding for its members and where new outcomes and results are to be found. Stacey writes,
The creative process in human systems, therefore, is inevitably messy: it involves difference, conflict, fantasy, and emotion; it stirs up anger, envy, depression, and many other feelings. To remove the mess by inspiring us to follow some common vision, share the same culture, and pull together is to remove the mess that is the very raw material of creative activity. (Stacey, 1996, p.15)
Small groups as complex adaptive systems contain rich dynamic relationships and complex feedback loops with nonlinear effects. When the continuum from highly organized to highly disorganized structures is included, it becomes clear that long-term forecasts and predictions in small group behaviors cannot be made. Arrow writes, “Complex systems whose behavior depends largely on interactions among local elements are predictable only in the short run, and these predictions are for global variables, not local variables.” (Arrow et al., 2000, pp. 56-57) Large general trends can be forecasted, but not specific instances. Stacey points out that long-term outcome are unknowable at the edge of chaos.
Scott Peck describes in detail the process by which a group may move to what he calls “true community.” (Peck, 1987) Peck’s descriptive model closely parallels the theory presented by Arrow and Stacey. The work of building community involves learning to discuss, challenge, debate, compromise, and find consensus. Members of the group must learn to suspend ego, set aside prejudices and preconceptions, actively listen and negotiate. They must continually ensure that the structure is sound, that individuals are safe and that all persons are respected. They must be aware that human nature errs and ensure that the salve of forgiveness is always available.
Chaos occurs periodically during this process of community building. Members argue, take sides, and question whether the process is worth the cost. It is at this time the group must ground itself in its fundamental commitments and agree to work through the chaos. If the group is successful, the emergent property of true community may develop. In true community, a high level of trust exists and members feel safe to be themselves. There is a spirit of cooperation, collaboration, and respect for the talents and experiences of each member. Peck’s description of true community closely parallels the phenomenon of emergent spirituality. In true community, spiritual needs previously discussed are experienced by members of the group.
Peck relates that if a group is unsuccessful in passing through chaos, it will move to a state that he calls “pseudo-community.” (Peck, 1987, pp.86-90) The state is marked by superficial relationships and a lack of genuine cooperation and collaboration. A strong possibility is that the group in this state may splinter and dissolve. If the group remains together in this state of pseudo-community, it will exhibit factors listed above that stifle spiritual needs of members.
