GROUP
Two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have come together to
achieve particular objectives. Groups can be either formal or informal
Formal group, we mean one defined by the organization’s structure, with designated work
assignments establishing tasks. In formal groups, the behaviors team members should
engage in are stipulated by and directed toward organizational goals.
Informal group is neither formally structured nor organizationally determined. Informal
groups are natural formations in the work environment that appear in response to the need
for social contact.
The Five-Stage Model
the five-stage group-development model characterizes groups as proceeding through the
distinct stages of forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. The first stage,
forming stage, is characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose,
structure, and leadership. Members “test the waters” to determine what types of behaviors
are acceptable. This stage is complete when members have begun to think of themselves as
part of a group. The storming stage is one of intragroup conflict. Members accept the
existence of the group but resist the constraints it imposes on individuality. There is conflict
over who will control the group. When this stage is complete, there will be a relatively clear
hierarchy of leadership within the group. In the third stage, close relationships develop and
the group demonstrates cohesiveness. There is now a strong sense of group identity and
camaraderie. This norming stage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the
group has assimilated a common set of expectations of what defines correct member
behavior. The fourth stage is performing. The structure at this point is fully functional and
accepted. Group energy has moved from getting to know and understand each other to
performing the task at hand. For permanent work groups, performing is the last stage in
development. However, for temporary committees, teams, task forces, and similar groups
that have a limited task to perform, the adjourning stage is for wrapping up activities and
preparing to disband. Some group members are upbeat, basking in the group’s
accomplishments. Others may be depressed over the loss of camaraderie and friendships
gained during the work group’s life.
GROUP PROPERTIES
Role
A set of expected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a
social unit.
Role Perception An individual’s view of how he or she is supposed to act in a given situation
is a role perception. We get role perceptions from stimuli all around us—for example,
friends, books, films, television, as when we form an impression of the work of doctors from
watching Grey’s Anatomy
Role expectations How others believe a person should act in a given situation
Role conflict A situation in which an individual is confronted by divergent role expectations.
In the workplace, we look at role expectations through the perspective of the psychological
contract: an unwritten agreement that exists between employees and employer. This
agreement sets out mutual expectations: what management expects from workers and vice
versa
Zimbardo’s Prison Experiment
Philip Zimbardo and his associates. They created a “prison” in the basement of the Stanford
psychology building; hired at $15 a day two dozen emotionally stable, physically healthy,
law-abiding students who scored “normal average” on extensive personality tests; randomly
assigned them the role of either “guard” or “prisoner”; and established some basic rules.
Surprisingly, during the entire experiment—even after days of abuse—not one prisoner said,
“Stop this. I’m a student like you. This is just an experiment!”
Norms
Acceptable standards of behavior within a group that are shared by the group’s members.
Conformity
The adjustment of one’s behavior to align with the norms of the group
Status A socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members by others.
What Determines Status?
According to status characteristics theory, status tends to derive from one of three
sources: 1. The power a person wields over others. Because they likely control the group’s
resources, people who control the outcomes tend to be perceived as high status.
2. A person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals. People whose contributions are
critical to the group’s success tend to have high status. Some thought NBA star Kobe Bryant
had more say over player decisions than his coaches (though not as much as Bryant
wanted!).
3. An individual’s personal characteristics. Someone whose personal characteristics are
positively valued by the group (good looks, intelligence, money, or a friendly personality)
typically has higher status than someone with fewer valued attributes.
Status characteristics theory A theory that states that differences in status characteristics
create status hierarchies within groups
SIZE
Smaller groups are faster at completing tasks than larger ones, and individuals perform
better in smaller groups. However, in problem solving, large groups consistently get better
marks than their smaller counterparts
Social loafing The tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working
collectively than when working individually There are several ways to prevent social loafing:
(1) Set group goals, so the group has a common purpose to strive toward; (2) increase
intergroup competition, which again focuses on the shared outcome; (3) engage in peer
evaluation so each person evaluates each other person’s contribution; (4) select members
who have high motivation and prefer to work in groups, and (5) if possible, base group
rewards in part on each member’s unique contributions.
Cohesiveness The degree to which group members are attracted to each other and are
motivated to stay in the group.
What can you do to encourage group cohesiveness? (1) Make the group smaller, (2)
encourage agreement with group goals, (3) increase the time members spend together, (4)
increase the group’s status and the perceived difficulty of attaining membership, (5)
stimulate competition with other groups, (6) give rewards to the group rather than to
individual members, and (7) physically isolate the group
Diversity The extent to which members of a group are similar to, or different from, one
another. Diversity appears to increase group conflict, especially in the early stages of a
group’s tenure, which often lowers group morale and raises dropout rates. One study
compared groups that were culturally diverse (composed of people from different
countries) and homogeneous (composed of people from the same country).
Groups versus the Individual
Decision-making groups may be widely used in organizations, but are group decisions
preferable to those made by an individual alone? The answer depends on a number of
factors.
Strengths of Group Decision Making
Groups generate more complete information and knowledge. By aggregating the resources
of several individuals, groups bring more input as well as heterogeneity into the decision
process. They offer increased diversity of views. This opens up the opportunity to consider
more approaches and alternatives. Finally, groups lead to increased acceptance of a
solution. Group members who participated in making a decision are more likely to
enthusiastically support and encourage others to accept it.
Weaknesses of Group Decision Making
Group decisions are time consuming because groups typically take more time to reach a
solution. There are conformity pressures. The desire by group members to be accepted and
considered an asset to the group can squash any overt disagreement. Group discussion can
be dominated by one or a few members. If they’re low- and medium-ability members, the
group’s overall effectiveness will suffer. Finally, group decisions suffer from ambiguous
responsibility. In an individual decision, it’s clear who is accountable for the final outcome.
In a group decision, the responsibility of any single member is diluted
Effectiveness and Efficiency
Whether groups are more effective than individuals depends on how you define
effectiveness. Group decisions are generally more accurate than the decisions of the
average individual in a group, but less accurate than the judgments of the most accurate.
69 In terms of speed, individuals are superior. If creativity is important, groups tend to be
more effective. And if effectiveness means the degree of acceptance the final solution
achieves, the nod again goes to the group
Group Decision-Making Techniques
The most common form of group decision making takes place in interacting groups: Typical
groups in which members interact with each other face to face.
Brainstorming, the nominal group technique, and electronic meetings can reduce problems
inherent in the traditional interacting group.
brainstorming An idea-generation process that specifically encourages any and all
alternatives while withholding any criticism of those alternatives.
nominal group technique A group decision-making method in which individual members
meet face to face to pool their judgments in a systematic but independent fashion. The
nominal group technique restricts discussion or interpersonal communication during the
decision-making process, hence the term nominal. Group members are all physically
present, as in a traditional committee meeting, but they operate independently. Specifically,
a problem is presented and then the group takes the following steps:
1. Before any discussion takes place, each member independently writes down ideas on
the problem.
2. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to the group. No discussion
takes place until all ideas have been presented and recorded.
3. The group discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them.
4. Each group member silently and independently rank-orders the ideas. The idea with the
highest aggregate ranking determines the final decision
Electronic meeting The most recent approach to group decision making blends the nominal
group technique with sophisticated computer technology. 84 It’s called a
computerassisted group, or an electronic meeting A meeting in which members interact on
computers, allowing for anonymity of comments and aggregation of votes.
conflict A process that begins when one party perceives that another party has negatively
affected, or is about to negatively affect, something that the first party cares about.
traditional view of conflict The belief that all conflict is harmful and must be avoided The
early approach to conflict assumed all conflict was bad and to be avoided. Conflict was
viewed negatively and discussed with such terms as violence, destruction, and
irrationality to reinforce its negative connotation. This traditional view of conflict was
consistent with attitudes about group behavior that prevailed in the 1930s and 1940s.
interactionist view of conflict The belief that conflict is not only a positive force in a
group but also an absolute necessity for a group to perform effectively. The interactionist
view of conflict encourages conflict on the grounds that a harmonious, peaceful, tranquil,
and cooperative group is prone to becoming static, apathetic, and unresponsive to needs for
change and innovation.The major contribution of this view is recognizing that a minimal
level of conflict can help keep a group viable, self-critical, and creative.
functional conflict Conflict that supports the goals of the group and improves its
performance.
dysfunctional conflict Conflict that hinders group performance.
Types of conflict
Task conflict relates to the content and goals of the work. Relationship conflict focuses
on interpersonal relationships. Process conflict relates to how the work gets done.
