“An Appraisal of Group Dynamics of Farmer Producer Organisation in the upper Brahmaputra valley zone of Assam”

 

  INTRODUCTION

 

Human beings need membership in small groups for many reasons. They need it to meet distinctly the need of inclusion, affection and control, the need to belong or be included with other, a need for love and a need for power in relation to both other persons and environment (Schutz,1958). The social process by which people interact and behave in a group environment is called group dynamics. Group dynamics involves the influence of personality, power, and behaviour on the group process. It is the internal nature of the group-how they are formed, what are their structures and processes, how do they function and affect individual members, other groups and the organization (Bhatt, 2010). Indian agriculture is predominantly characterized by large number of dispersed and fragmented small holdings. Around 85% of the land holdings belong to small and marginal farmers. Being unorganized, these farmers are unable to realize good value for their produce. Formation of Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) goes a long way in mitigating the problems of these farmers. A Farmer Producer Organisation is a legal entity formed by farmers which provides for sharing of profits/benefits among the members (Anonymous, 2015).

In a FPO, farmer-members interact amongst themselves in relatively enduring basis, identify themselves as belonging to a distinct unit, sharing certain common activities and values. Members of the group relate to each other in some way that is united by common ties, beliefs and perceptions in a relatively sustained and structured basis. This dynamic interplay of forces between the members of any working group significantly contributes to its productivity and hence it becomes very essential to study them. The internal nature of the group and the significant forces that contribute to its performance can be studied by analyzing the dynamics of the group.  As FPOs are currently a thrust strategy for organizing farmers in India, therefore, a study to explore the status of group dynamics effectiveness among the FPO members is the need of the hour. Against this backdrop, the present study has been formulated with the under-mentioned objectives.

 

OBJECTIVES OF THE INVESTIGATION

1. Study the personal and socio-economic profile of the members of the Farmer Producer Organisations

2. Measure the Group Dynamics Effectiveness of the Farmer Producer Organisations.

 3. Identify the constraints faced by the Farmer Producer Organisations

 

A BRIEF RESUME OF WORK DONE IN INDIA AND ABROAD

        

WORK DONE IN INDIA

 

Vipin kumar (1994) in his study of dynamics of perceived group cohesiveness among the members of group farming committees in the adoption of rice production technology found a significant correlation of cohesiveness on their interpersonal communication behaviour with nine identified sub-dimensions such as communication skill, competence, empathy, authenticity, interpersonal trust, consistency, positiveness reciprocity and rationality.

Fernandez (1995) in the study of Group Dynamics of Self Help Groups in Mysore Rehabilitation Development Agency (MYRADA) gave rise to characteristics such as common action, cost effective credit delivery system, collective learning, democratic culture, entrepreneurial set up, fare for dialogue and cooperation, credibility and power to ensure participation, for assessment of individual members’ management capacity.

Manab Sen (2000) has find out that the group dynamics was an instrument for change in the quality of life of the poor people. The study also revealed that other than economic activities, the groups worked towards primary education, basic health care of family, safe drinking water and environment protection. The study concluded that group cohesion, group action, need-based credit timely repayment are essential elements for sustainability of the groups.

Lalitha and Nagarajan (2002) investigate the group dynamics of SHGs, identify the factors which contributed to the success/failure of the groups and study the income generating programmes promoted by SHGs. The study also revealed that effective leadership, group Cohesiveness, savings, regular meetings, peer-group pressure, linkage with other institutions and effective supervision by the NGOs were the factors which contributed to the success of the groups.

Vipinkumar and Singh (2002) based on their study ‘Dimensions of self-help group dynamics of horticulture farmers’ disclosed that the deep rooted influence of the group dynamic network among the farmers folk as influence by their participations, influence and style of influence, decision making procedures, task functions, maintenance functions, group atmosphere, memberships, feelings, norms, empathy, interpersonal trust and achivements.

Purnima (2004) found that Self Help Group Dynamics was influenced by interpersonal trust, task functions, maintenance functions and conformation to norms.

Ganguli (2005) reported that majority (68.89%) of the members of dairy based SHGs of Alwar district of Rajasthan were in medium category of group dynamics effectiveness.

 On the other hand, Vipin and Singh (2002) reported that 52.22 percent of the members of horticulture based SHGs of Kerala were in high category of group dynamics effectiveness.

Lina et al. (2008) reported that group dynamics effectiveness of women-led agro-processing SHGs of Kerala has been determined by factors like group cohesion, group leadership, team spirit, group decision making and regularity in maintenance records.

Sashi et al (2008) studied that Group dynamics effectiveness of SHG is not a unit act but a complex process involving sequence of action and activities. The action of individual group member is governed by socio, personal, and psychological characteristics involved in a particular situation.

Vashisht et al. (2008) conduct a study in Haryana and found that performance of individual members was low, but the members of the groups were found to be very dynamic, which indicated that they could take up all activates to a high degree of satisfaction. On the contrary, individual members was not able to perform all activates satisfactory on his/her own.

Garai et al. (2013) studied the group dynamic effectiveness in West Bengal and found that livestock based farmers groups are not significantly different with rice based farmers groups and also in the line of rice base producer groups in term of group dynamics effectiveness. Majority of members from each type of farmers groups were in medium category in terms of their contribution to the group dynamics effectiveness in their respective groups.

 

 

WORK DONE IN ABROAD

 

Lewin (1936) used the term Group Dynamics to mean interaction of forces among group members in a social situation. In the course of time various meanings were attached to the term Group Dynamics.

Lewin et al. (1960) made several studies on Group Dynamics and suggested it as to how they are formed, what their structures and procedures are, how they function with individual members, other groups and organizations.

Pfeiffer and Jones (1972) identified the Group Dynamics factors as to how the group is organized, the manner in which the group is led, the amount of training in membership and leadership skills, the task given to the groups, its prior history of success or failure etc. The identified indicators by them for  analysing Group Dynamics are participation, influence, styles of influence, decision making procedures, task functions, maintenance functions, group atmosphere, ,membership, feelings and norms.

Paulus (1989) had result of investigation to support aspects viz. status, norms, and cohesiveness of group, as playing crucial role in Group Dynamics.

Lal (1994) while studying Group Dynamics emphasized on two meanings. One is regarding how a group should be organized and conducted, and the other is a set of techniques to make the leader as well as the members effective in the group.        

Hersey and Blanchard (1995) emphasized on helping and hindering roles the individuals play in groups such as establishing, aggressive, persuading, manipulative, committing, dependent, and attending and avoidance as factors to influence Group Dynamics.

Myers (1996) in the study of dynamics of group influence identified three factors such as social facilitation, social loafing and deindividuation. Likewise the three components of social influence in interacting groups were group polarization, group thinking and minority influence.

 

TECHNICAL PROGRAMME OF WORK

A.    Sampling plan:

A brief description of the overall research methodology adopted in the present study is laid out under the following headings:

 

1.      Locale of the study: The study will be conducted in the Upper Brahmaputra Valley Zone in the state of Assam, India.

 

2.      Research design: A descriptive research design, following an ex post facto approach will be followed for the present study.

 

3.      Sampling design: A multi-stage, purposive cum random cum convenience sampling design would be adopted for the present study. The sampling stages are detailed underneath:

        i.            Selection of agro-climatic zone: Upper Brahmaputra valley Zone, one of the six agro-climatic zones of Assam, would be selected purposively for the study on account of familiarity of the researcher with the zone.

 

2. Selection of district:  Two district from the Upper Brahmaputra Valley Zone of Assam would be selected randomly for the study.

 

3. Selection of Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs): Through convenience sampling, a minimum of 20 FPOs would be selected within the purview of the study, 10 each from the two selected districts.

 

4. Selection of respondents: From each of the selected FPOs, 5 members would be selected randomly as respondents for the study. Thereby, a total of 100 respondents is proposed to be included in the study sample from the 20 selected FPOs.

B.  Measurement of variables:

The personal and socio-economic profile of the members of the Farmer Producer Organisations (FPOs) proposed to be studied include age, education, annual income, family size, material possession & social participation.

‘Group Dynamics Effectiveness’ of the FPOs and its members would be quantified with the help of an index called as ‘Group Dynamics Effectiveness Index (GDEI)’ developed by Purnima (2004).

 A semi-structured research schedule would be developed to collect information regarding the problems faced by the FPOs.

 

 C. Collection of data: Both primary and secondary data will be collected for the study. Data collection for the investigation would be done with the help of a pretested, structured cum semi-structured research schedule by personal interview method.

D.  Analysis of data: Keeping in view the nature of the data and objectives of the study, suitable descriptive statistical measures would be adopted for the proposed study.

 

    COLLABORATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS

 

The helps and assistance will be sought from the following departments    throughout the course of study.

·         Department of Agril. Econ and Farm Management, BNCA

·         Department of Agricultural Statistics, BNCA

·         District Agriculture Offices of the sample districts

·         District NABARD Offices of the sample districts

·         KVKs of the sample districts

     

    

REFERENCE

 

Anonymous, (2015). Farmer Producer Organisations: Frequently Asked Questions             (FAQs).                     National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mumbai.

Bhatt, M.R. (2010). Group dynamics in tribal women self-help group of Vansda taluka in                                       Gujarat state. M.Sc. (Agri.) Thesis (Published). Anand Agricultural University,       Anand.

Feldman, R.S. (1997). Understanding Psychology. (4th ed.). Tata McGraw Hill, New       Delhi. p. 618.

Fernandez, A.P. (1995). Self Help Groups - The Concept. Mysore Rehabilitation   Development                            Agency. p. 1-5.

Ganguli, S. (2005). Study of Women Self Help Group Dynamics in Dairying. M.Sc.          Thesis.                             (unpub.). NDRI Deemed University, Karnal, India.

Garai, S.; Mazumder, G. and Maiti, S. (2013) Group dynamics effectiveness among self-  help groups                     in West Bengal. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education.     13(1): 68-71.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1995). Management of Organizational Behaviour (6th ed.)                                      Prentice Hall, New Delhi. p. 345-362.

Lal, M.M. (1994). KHDP Self Help Group Formation. Training module. p. 15- 45.

Lewin, K. (1936). A Dynamic Theory of Personality. Mc Graw Hill, New York. p. 30.

Lewin, K., Lippet, R. and White, R. (1960). Leader behaviour and member reaction in      three social                 climates. In Group Dynamics: Research and Theory (2nd ed.) Eds.

Lina, J., Prema, A. and Krishnan, S. (2008). Determinants of group performance of           women-led                 agro-processing self-help groups in Kerala, Agricultural Economics          Research Review, 21                 (Conference Number): 355-362.

Myers, D.G. (1996). Social Psychology (5th edn.). The Mc Graw Hill Inc., New York. p.              314-                    352.

Paulus, P.B. (1989). Psychology of Influence (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Pfeiffer, J.W. and Jones, E.J. (1972). Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators.Vol. 3.       Pfeiffer &                         Company, San Diego, California. p. 19-24.

Purnima, K. S. (2004). Women Self-Help Group Dynamics in the North Central Zone of   Andhra                         Pradesh. PhD Thesis (unpub.). Acharya N.G. Ranga Agricultural       University, Hyderabad,                     India.

Robbins, S.P. (1996). Organizational Behaviour (7th ed.). Prentice Hall, New Delhi. p.      294-459.

Sashi Vashisht, Kumud Khanna, Renu Arora and Nirmala Yadav (2008). Dimension of    group                         dynamics effectiveness of self-help group of rural women in Haryana  . Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu.                 8 (1): 42-45.

Schutz, W. C. (1958). FIRO:  A three-dimensional theory of    interpersonal                       relations. NY:             Holt, Rinehart

Sen.,   Manab  (2000),   "Self  Help  Groups  and   micro  finance":NGOs and Socio          Economic                     development Opportunities, New Delhi; Deep and deep Publication            Pvt.Ltd. pp.77-89.

Vashisht, S.; Khanna, K.; Arora, R. and Yadav, N. (2008) Dimension of group dynamics effectiveness of             self help groups of rural women in Haryana. Indian Research      Journal of Extension                             Education. 8(1):             42-45

Vipin kumar, VP. (1994). Interpersonal communication behaviour of members of group     farming                     committees in the adoption of rice production technology. MSc. (Ag.)   thesis (Unpubl.). Kerala             Agricultural University, Thrissur.

Vipinkumar, V.P and Singh, B. (2002) Dimensions of self help group dynamics of             horticultural                     farmers. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education. 2(1): 6-12.