Groups and Groups Dynamics

Definition of a groupA group exist in an organisation if its members:

are motivated to joinPerceive the group as a unified unit of interacting

peopleContribute in various amounts to the group

processes Reach agreement and have disagreement through

various forms of interactions

Definition of a group a group is two or more people who interact with

each other, share common beliefs and view themselves as being members of a group

At minimum , to be considered a group, at least who people must deal with one another on a continuing basis

Before they interact with each other, they are likely to share common beliefs that impel them to band together

Over time, other shared values may emerge and be solidified

As a consequence of continuing interaction and awareness of shared beliefs, the individuals will see themselves as belonging to a distinct entity – the group

Formal vs. informal groups Formal groups – found in organisations where people

are frequently assigned to work in groups. Are task oriented.eg. A committee, a department

Therefore every organisation member must belong to at least one organizational group – i.e. every employee must have at least one formal role

Some organisation members may have more than one formal role (groups) - be member of a several committees and still belong to a department

Such multiple members can serve as a “linking pins” within the organisation who can enhance integration by sharing information across groups and passing directives to lower levels

Informal groups

Arise from social interactions among organizational members

Formed for political friendship or common interestMembership in such groups is voluntary and more

heavily based on interpersonal attractionsSometimes the activities and goals of an informal

group are attractive to prospective members – for example a group which plays cards games during lunch time

Note that not all informal groups have a specific set of activities, often they are simply composed of coworkers who share common concern – rumours, gossips etc

Informal groups are not inherently good or bad for an organisation

When informal groups goals are congruent with the organisation - such as when both seek to maximize customer satisfaction and produce a high quality products – then all is well and good

However, an informal group may oppose the organizational goals as when employees decide to restrict daily output, the informal groups are often sources of resistance to organizational change

Group dynamicsAre the interactions and forces among group members in social situations

Focuses on dynamics of member of both formal or informal groups

Describes how groups are organised and conducted in terms of: group leadership, members participation cooperation in the group

Why individuals form/join groups (reasons) 1. Physical and psychological distance/proximity

– people who are sitting or working in one area, or office are likely to form a group

Generally people who are physically close to one another develop closer relationship than those that are farther apart

The placement of office doors (psychological distance) does not encourage eye contact as people work and reduces need for . Therefore office layout can encourage or discourage group formation

Managers can consciously structure work setting, depending on whether the goals is to crate comradeship ship and groups spirit or to reduce informal contacts

2. Sharing common activities – this leads to more interactions and hence form groups in order to accomplish the common goals more easily

3. Security and protection Group membership can give an individual a sense of

security and a real degree of protection Being one member of a larger organisation can

generate a feeling of insecurity and anxiety, but belong to a small group can reduce such fears by providing a sense of unity with others

During times of stress, such as when the organisation is changing direction or leadership, belonging to a stable and supportive work unit can reduce individual anxiety

By virtue of sheer numbers, group afford a degree of protection than can individual might not otherwise enjoy

This is the principle behind union movement which attempts to give members are sense of protection through highly organised collective strength

4. AffiliationAn individual need for affiliation and emotional

support can be directly satisfied by membership in a group[

Acceptance by others is an important social needFeeling accepted by others at work can help enhance

once feeling of self worth

5. Esteem and Identity Groups also provide an opportunity for an individual

to feel importantThey can give a person status and provide

opportunities for praise and recognitionMany workers achievements may not be appreciated

or understood by people unfamiliar with the nature of job. But by joining groups that does understand the job (either within the organisation or professional associations), people tend to gain opportunities to receive recognition and esteem for their accomplishment

Membership in a group also helps people to define who they are in the social scheme of things. Seeing oneself as a salesperson , an economist, or a teamster helps foster a feeling of identification with a larger purpose

Through membership in a work group, a persons gains formal tile and a sense of purpose

6. Task accomplishmentA primary reason that groups are created is to

facilitate task accomplishmentA group can often accomplish more through joint

effort than can an equal number of individuals working separate

Many goals are attainable only thro groups cooperative effort

By sharing ideals, pooling resources, providing feedback to members, a group can be an effective mechanism for attaining otherwise difficult goals

7. Similarity

Do “opposites attract” or “ birds of a feather flock together”

Do people who are dissimilar in terms of sex, race, income, age, religion and the like find each others company more satistifying than people who are highly similar on these dimension.

Although much of the research on this topic points to the potential of both processes, attraction among similar people appears to be more somewhat common

People with similar attitudes , values towards commonly relevant object and goals, needs and abilities .e.g. religion, politics, Lifestyle, work , authority etc are likely to form groups

If they no longer share common values/attitudes, then the relationship is dissolved

8. Because of the expected reward – cost outcome of interaction

rewards must be greater than the cost of an outcome in order for attraction or affiliation to take places

Rewards will gratify needs while cost will incur anxiety, frustration, embarrassment, fatigue

9.Economic reason - economic ( group incentive plans)

Stages in Team DevelopmentFormingStormingNormingPerformingAdjourning

FormingThis is the initial stage and is marked by:

Members testing each others reaction to determine which actions are acceptable and unacceptable

Members depend on each other for cues about what is expected in the way of contribution and personal conduct

Uncertainty and confusionGroup members are not sure about the group in terms

of the purpose, structures, tasks and leadership groups get preoccupied with getting and an identity

and understanding purpose, functions

StormingThis is the stage characters by:

intragroup conflict and confrontation – there may be considerable hostility disagreement and conflicts as members wrestle with how power and status will be divided

Members may resist the formation of a group structure and ignore the desire of the group leader

Members are trying to clarifying issues and resolve conflict resolution

NormingThe members in this stage begin to cooperate and

collaborateA feeling of cohesiveness developsThey have a “we” feeling Members attraction to the team is strengthened, and

job satisfaction grow as the level of cohesiveness increases

Cooperation and a sense of shared responsibility are primary teams at this stage

Developing and promoting team spiritHave group identity and comradeship Setting rules and regulations

PerformingThis is the stage where the group is fully functional

and devoted to effectivenessThe group has established a flexible network of

relationship that aids task accomplishmentInternal hostility is at a low point as the group

directs its energies towards successful performance of valued tasks

Accomplishing the tasks agreed upon at the norming stage

Engagement in the task as per objectives

Adjourning stageThis represents the end of the group, which ongoing,

permanent groups will never reachThis stage is reach by project teams or task oriented

team with specific objects and once the objectives have been accomplished, the group is disbanded

Types of groupsPrimary groupsCoalitionsMembership groups Reference groupsFormal groups Informal groups

Primary groupsIs a small group with a feeling of:

comradeshipLoyallyCommon sense of values among the membersE.g. family group and peer groupsSmall work groups especially self managed teams which

perform a function to produce a product a service

CoalitionsAn interactive group of individualsDeliberately structures by the members for a specific

purposeindependent of the formal organization structureLacking formal internal structures Mutual perception of membershipIssue oriented and advance the purpose of membersCoalitions are very powerful and often effective entriet in

the organizationE.g. employees form a coalition to overcome petty

conflicts and ineffective management to get the job done

Membership groupsGroups which an individual must actually formally

belong e.g. a unionReference groups A group which an individual would like to belong -

that which he/she identifies with e.g. a prestigious social group

Formal group Formal and informal groups are the ones which are

most applicable to the study of OB

Impact of group on performance The mere presence of othersResearch has focused on the effect of the mere

presence of others on an individual performance. Results of such studies indicate that having others nearby tends to facilitate performance on relatively simple and well rehearsed tasks.

However, for fairly complex tasks, the presence of others can have a detrimental effect

The positive effect of others being present is called social facilitation effect, while the detrimental effect is termed as social inhibition effect

For example if you are asked to perform in front of an audience, and your assigned task is relatively easy, you do it relatively well, but if the task is something you have never done before or a little difficult you notice you do it poorly

The reason for the effects is twofold:When we expect others to evaluate us, we feel

apprehensive (regardless of whether we are actually being judged)

The presence of others can increase arousal because of greater self-evaluation of performance. Such self evaluation can aid performance of a simple task, but impair performance of a difficult task.

The implication of this line of research are that for a task that are simple and repetitive, the presence of coworkers can have a positive effect, where for complex and novel task, working in isolation is preferred

sizeGroup size has a detectable effects on group

performance,In large groups, potential impact and contribution of

each individual are somewhat diminished, but the total resources of the group are increased

Administering a large group also creates unique problems for managers

Most organisations settle of groups of five to seven to handle most problems-solving task and for span of control

Several conclusions have been made about group sizeFirst, members appear to become more tolerant of

authorities and directive leadership as group size increase. Apparently, group members recognise and concede the administrative difficulties that can arise in a large work unit. In addition, as unit size increases, it become more difficult for handful of subordinates to be influential, and members may feel inhibited about participating in group activities

Secondly, lager groups are more likely to have formalized rules and set procedures for dealing with problems.

Despite the grater formality, larger groups require more time to reach decisions than smaller groups. Additionally, subgroups are not committed to the full groups formal goals and prefer instead to pursue the more selfish interest of a few members [

Thirdly, in a review of research on group size, research suggests that job satisfaction is lower in larger groups. This properly occurs because people receive less personal attention and fewer opportunities to participate. It is also likely that employees in smaller work units feel that their presence is more crucial to the group and therefore incline to e more involved

For blue collar workers, absenteeism and turnover increases with larger work groups

Cohesion and communication decrease with greased group size, making it less attractive and lessening the workers desire to attend

Fourthly, as group size increase, productivity reaches a point of diminishing returns, because of the rising difficulties of coordination and members involvement – hence the group of 5 – 7 in units

CompositionHow well a group perform a task depends in a large

part on the task relevant resources of its membersThe diversity versus redundancy of its traits and

abilities, then is an important factor in explaining groups performance

Groups composed of highly similar individuals who hold common beliefs and have the same abilities are more likely to view a task form a single perspective

Such solidarity can be productive, but may also mean that members will lack a critical ingredient for unraveling a certain kind of problem

One of the groups greatest assets in comparison to individuals acting alone is the likelihood of achieving higher-quality solutions

We can therefore reasonably expect that diversified groups tend to do better on many problem-solving task than do homogeneous group of highly similar individuals

Diverse abilities and experiences of the members of a heterogeneous group offer an advantage for generating innovative solution, provided the skills and experiences are relevant to the task

Thus merely adding more people to a problem solving group to broaden the pool of skills and experiences will not guarantee a better job

Attention must be the relevance of the members attributes within the group

Additionally, the more competent members of a work group must also be the most influential members

Roles Every member of a group has a different set of

activities to performThe set of expected behaviour relating to an

individual position within a group is called a role A persons formal role in a group may be defined in a

job description or in a manual

Factors which determine group performance/effectiveness - Group cohesiveness LeadershipTask interdependent ( how closely group members

work together)Outcome interdependent ( whether and how group

performance is rewardedPotency ( members belief that groups can be

effective)

Group cohesiveness and leadership – based on the study by SchadlerGroup cohesiveness has a highly significant effect on

performanceCohesiveness is the extent to which members are

attracted to a group and desire to remain in itIt is described as the sum of all forces acting on

individuals to remain in the groupCohesiveness pertains to how group members “stick

together”

Factors that induce and sustain group cohesiveness Similarity of attitudes and goals when group members have similar attitudes, they

find each others company pleasurable. So, too, individuals members will be attracted to a

group whose goals and ambitions are similar to their own

ThreatsThe presence of external threats can help to increase

group cohesiveness in that sharing a mutual fate can lead to greater awareness of interdependence

Competition from sources outside the group can also enhance cohesiveness, whereas competition among groups will tend to decrease cohesiveness

Unit sizeSmaller groups tend to be more cohesive than larger

groups because smaller groups offer greater opportunities to interact with all members

Since diversity and therefore dissimilarity of attitudes and values tend to increase with group size, larger groups are likely to be less cohesive

In a addition, in larger units, the need for more rigid work rules and procedures reduce the informal nature of relations and communication among group members

Reward systemCohesiveness can be increased by offering reward on

a group rather than an individualGroup incentives encourage like bonuses based on

team performance encourage perception of a common fate and enhance cooperation

Reward schemes that encourage competition among group members tend to diminish group cohesiveness

Work unit assignmentThe deliberate composition of work unit based on interpersonal

attraction, similarity of values and common goals can facilitate cohesiveness

The work team that are formed on the basis of personal preferences have high level of job satisfaction than did the randomly assigned work wok units

IsolationGenerally, groups that are isolated form others are more likely t be

more cohesiveGroups in isolation come to view themselves as unique and different Isolation also helps to foster group members sense of common fate

and need for defense against outside threats

Highly cohesive group that is given a positive leadership will have the highest productivity ad vise versa

Factors that increase/decrease cohesivenessAgreement/disagreement on group goalsFrequency of interactionsSize of the groupPersonal attractiveness vs. unpleasant experiencesIntergroup competition vs. intragroup competitionDominance by one or more members

The effect of cohesivenessSatisfaction Members of a highly cohesive groups are generally

much more satisfied than members of a less cohesive group

This is expected because by the very definition of group cohesion it is implied that a strong attractiveness among group members exist

CommunicationCommunication among group members is

significantly greater in highly cohesive groups than in less cohesive groups

This is because members of a cohesive group are likely to share common values and goals and find their own company satisfying, they are inclined to greater communicativeness

This communication in turn tend to foster greater personal revelation and depth of understanding which cement positive social relation

HostilityHostile and aggressive acts are more frequent in

highly cohesive groups, but such hostility is usually directed toward people who are not members of the group . Cohesion apparently creates a sense of superiority among group members which can result in hostility towards and rejection of outsiders

Productivity Some research has found cohesive groups to be very

productive, which others have found that highly cohesive groups are not as productive as less cohesive groups

Still other researchers have reported no relationship between productivity and group cohesion

It appear that a primary determinant of the effect of cohesion on productivity is whether the group goals are congruent with those of the organisation

If the goals of the cohesive group goals includes performance, then high performance can be reasonably expected.

Conversely, if a highly cohesive group values reduced productivity , then a relatively low level of productivity can be expected

In short, , cohesive groups are more likely to attain their goals than are less cohesive groups

Resistance to changeAlthough it is less well document, social scientist

generally believe that highly cohesive groups are more resistant to change than are less cohesive groups

Changes that disrupt the status quo threaten a groups networks and social support and are, therefore likely to be resisted

Attempt at job design that ignore the existing social relations among employees runs a greater risk of failing