Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to construct a theoretical model for small group Adaptive Potential Assessment Model (G-APAM) analogous to the Adaptive Potential Assessment Model for individuals (I-APAM) based on existing knowledge. I-APAM is based on differing abilities to mobilize coping resources in stress and non-stress states using indicators to differentiate states. The theoretical basis for this transposition is that complex adaptive systems include both groups and individuals. Methodology. This descriptive theoretical study used Delphi technique with a national panel of experts on I-APAM theory, group dynamics, stress management, and systems. Panel members responded to six electronic surveys, identifying stressed and non-stressed group behaviors, then differentiated those behaviors by effectiveness of coping potential. The panel compared the identified groups of behaviors to a four state I-APAM: arousal, impoverishment, adaptive equilibrium, and maladaptive equilibrium, and then compared I-APAM to groups. Data were analyzed using qualitative data reduction and percentages for panel feedback. With these findings, a G-APAM was proposed and presented to the panel to determine expert validity for the model. Findings. The panel agreed on eight behaviors as indicators of effective coping potential in a small group experiencing stress and twelve behaviors indicating ineffective coping potential. They selected sixteen behaviors indicating effective coping potential in a group not experiencing stress and one behavior indicating ineffective coping potential. Most panel members supported the underlying concept of G-APAM; but did not find that I-APAM fits groups. Conclusions and recommendations. The overall conclusion of this study supported the concept of G-APAM as a viable model for further research. G-APAM is more complex, and dynamic than I-APAM. G-APAM uses continua of stress level and effectiveness of coping potential to describe quadrants. G-APAM behaviors within these quadrants include collective affect, collective cognition, social support, and characteristics specific to groups. Since this study was the beginning of research into group adaptive potential, recommendations are made for further study. The conceptual model must be completed including the constellation of behaviors, especially for ineffective coping potential in low stress. The revised model needs field-testing in naturalistic settings.