Chapter 16 Overview of Group Dynamics

Overview of Chapter 16: Overview of Group Dynamics

• Humans are social beings with a fundamental need for affiliation and belonging. Groups help satisfy this need.
• Group dynamics is a term coined by Kurt Lewin to describe the subfield of organizational behavior focused on how groups develop, interact internally, interact with other groups, and relate to their environment.
• In health care, groups and teams are essential because most tasks require multiple resources and collaboration. Interdisciplinary teams are increasingly used to deliver effective, efficient care.
• Examples of organizational reliance on groups/teams in practice include: Federal Express with 4000 employee teams, Motorola with 2200 problem‑solving teams, and Xerox where ~75% of employees serve on task forces or advisory teams at any time. When moving into management roles, the objective shifts from individual performance to achieving results through others.
• Managers spend a large portion of their day in groups/teams (estimates range 50 ext{–}80 ext{ ext%}). In health care, teams include operating room teams, disease management teams, patient safety committees, biomedical ethics committees, patient care teams, trauma teams, and disaster-management teams. The trend toward accountable care organizations and patient-centered medical homes increases team importance.
• With geographic expansion and vertical integration, managers may work on virtual teams with members they have never met face to face.
• To manage groups effectively, managers need to understand: formation and development, structure, and interrelationships with individuals, other groups, and organizations.

What Is a Group?

• Social scientists typically define a group using four characteristics:
  • (1) Two or more people in social interaction
  • (2) A stable structure
  • (3) Common interests or goals
  • (4) Individuals perceiving themselves as a group
• Examples:
  • Not a group: two patients in an ED waiting together (no interaction, unstable environment, no coordinated goal, and no group identity).
  • A group: volunteers planning a fundraising event or a multidisciplinary team developing guidelines for congestive heart failure patients.
• A key aspect of group dynamics is understanding the interactions that occur between members.

Group Interaction

• Group interaction is the process by which members exchange verbal and nonverbal messages to influence one another. This includes talking, listening, nonverbal gestures, texts, emails, etc.

• Observation tools:

  • A sociogram maps group interactions: participants are circles; inputs are lines; arrows show direction of contributions; line thickness indicates interaction intensity. An outward arrow indicates group-wide input rather than to a single member.
  • A sociogram documents direction/intensity but not content; content analysis requires other tools (e.g., Bales's Interaction Process Analysis).

• Bales's Interaction Process Analysis (IPA) breaks group interactions into 12 categories. These are grouped into two broad domains:

  • Emotion (socioemotional) responses: positive vs negative
  • Task responses: information sharing (giving/asking for information)

• The 12 IPA categories are paired (1 with 12, 2 with 11, 3 with 10, 4 with 9, 5 with 8, 6 with 7). They influence the roles members assume and the group norms that emerge.

• Practical note: IPA helps researchers understand how communication patterns influence group roles and norms.

• Maslow’s hierarchy helps explain why people join groups: belonging/affiliation, safety, esteem, and self-actualization goals are often pursued through group membership. A cost–benefit analysis guides continued membership, analogous to Adams’s Equity Theory of Motivation.

Why Do People Join Groups?

• Primary drivers include Maslow’s needs for belonging and social connection; safety needs in ambiguous or threatening contexts; self‑esteem and social identity benefits from group acceptance and shared values; and the ability to achieve goals that would be unattainable alone.
• Group affiliation can satisfy a range of needs beyond individual payoff and can contribute to personal and group objectives.

Roles of Group Members

• Functional Role Theory (Benne & Sheats, 1948) identifies three broad function categories in small groups:

  • Task roles: roles that drive task completion (e.g., Initiator-contributor; Information-seeker; Information-giver; Elaborator; Coordinator/Orienter; Evaluator-critic; Energizer; Procedural-technician)
  • Maintenance roles: roles that promote group harmony and cohesion (e.g., Encourager; Harmonizer; Gatekeeper/Expediter; Compromiser; Standard setter; Recorder; Group observer; Follower)
  • Individual (self-centered) roles: counterproductive to group goals (e.g., Aggressor; Blocker; Recognition seeker; Self-confessor; Dominator; Help seeker)

• Bales’s IPA and Benne & Sheats’s framework align with Belbin’s Team Roles (see Belbin below) to describe how members contribute to group functioning.

• Key takeaway: Individuals assume different roles depending on both personal needs and group requirements. The balance of task and socioemotional roles influences leadership emergence and group satisfaction.

• Belbin’s Team Role Theory (1981, 1993, 2004) adds a nine-role framework for optimal team operation. The roles fall into three broad categories: task-oriented, maintenance (socioemotional), and individual (negative) roles. The nine roles are:

  • Chairman/Coordinator: coordinatest and aligns the team toward goals; rarely the source of ideas
  • Shaper: top-down leader; energetic, challenging, drives ideas to conclusions
  • Plant: creative, unorthodox problem solver; may be poor with people
  • Teamworker: interpersonally perceptive and caring; fosters collaboration but may be indecisive under pressure
  • Completer/Finisher: meticulous, ensures quality; may worry and resist when under pressure
  • Company Worker/Implementer: practical, implements plans; sometimes inflexible
  • Resource Investigator: outward-facing, networks to bring in ideas; may tire of routine
  • Monitor/Evaluator: analytical, critical; may be perceived as judgmental and less inspiring
  • Specialist: provides deep, unique knowledge; contributions are tied to their specialty

• Belbin’s nine roles map to the Benne & Sheats/IPA framework, emphasizing that effective groups need a balance of task leadership and people-centered focus.

Group Norms

• Norms are an implied code of conduct describing acceptable and unacceptable member behavior. They can be written or unwritten, positive/negative/neutral, and apply to all members or only to some.

• Formal rules exist in organizations (policies/procedures manuals) and acts as explicit standards (e.g., hospital infection-control procedures, correct patient identification, and correct procedure implementation). An example is the surgical safety checklist (Exhibit 16-2) which provides written standards for conduct and practice.

• Unwritten norms are learned through interaction and are internalized over time via socialization, becoming the standard against which behavior is measured.

• Crandall (1988) documented how norms can emerge around health behaviors (e.g., binge/purge norms among certain groups) which individuals adopt to align with the group.

• When norms are violated, groups may attempt to persuade the deviant to conform. If resistance continues, sanctions may include loss of special status, social rejection, or dismissal from the group.

• Norms serve several functions: they facilitate group survival, predictability, avoidance of embarrassment in interpersonal relations, and express central group values and identity.

• Norms are enforced most strongly under four conditions:

  • If norms facilitate group survival
  • If norms simplify expected behavior
  • If norms help avoid embarrassing interpersonal problems
  • If norms express the group’s core values and identity

• Example illustrations (from Feldman, 1984): groups may restrict knowledge sharing, require predictable office hours, avoid political discussions to reduce conflict, or use standardized dress to signal professional identity.

Cohesiveness

• Cohesion is the degree to which group members feel connected and committed to the group. Several factors influence cohesiveness, with the following being particularly important:
  • Group size: smaller groups tend to have higher interaction quality; optimal size is often cited as 5 members (small enough for meaningful interaction but large enough to generate diverse ideas).
  • Experience of success: prior success enhances unity; repeated failures can lead to infighting and disassociation.
  • Group status: higher status or selectivity in admission increases perceived belonging and in-group identity.
  • External threats: perceived external pressures can unite the group and reinforce esprit de corps, though this can also intensify conformity.
• Practical takeaway for managers: cohesive units tend to be more productive, but cohesion can backfire if norms promote low effort or irrelevant tasks. Norms mediate the cohesion-performance relationship (high norms for performance can boost cohesion and productivity; conversely, norms endorsing low output can reduce performance).
• Group social identification: the stronger members’ positive feelings about the group, the more they promote in-group solidarity and cooperation. However, excessive cohesiveness can increase conformity and reduce performance due to groupthink pressures.

Conformity and Groupthink

• Conformity is the tendency to adjust perceptions/behaviors to align with group norms (normative social influence). It supports harmony but can hinder performance by reducing innovation and critical thinking.
• Foundational conformity studies:
  • Sherif (1936): autokinetic effect; individuals in groups converge their estimates toward a group norm, illustrating the urge to conform.
  • Asch (1952, 1956): line-length judgment experiments; about one-third conformed, one-third did not, and one-third conformed at least once. Demonstrated pressure to conform even when the task is obvious.
• Not all individuals conform; traits such as healthy self-esteem, mature social relationships, flexibility, and openness relate to lower conformity. Some cultures emphasizing collectivism reduce social loafing and conformity-driven reductions in creativity.
• Conformity can lead to groupthink when a group prioritizes harmony over critical thinking, resulting in poor decisions. Janis (1982) identified eight symptoms of groupthink, categorized as follows:
  • Type I: Overestimation of the group’s power and morality
  • Illusion of invulnerability
  • Unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality
  • Type II: Closed-mindedness
  • Rationalization to discount warnings or new information
  • Stereotyped views of enemies/leaders as either too evil to negotiate or too weak to counter
  • Type III: Pressures toward uniformity
  • Self-censorship of deviations from perceived group consensus
  • Illusion of unanimity
  • Direct pressure on dissenters
  • Mindguards (members who shield the group from adverse information)
• HealthSouth case (Exhibit 16-3) provides a real-world example of how groupthink and a “family” culture can contribute to unethical decisions, fraud, and cover-up efforts.
• Safeguards against groupthink (often recommended but with mixed effectiveness):
  • Seek outside expert opinions
  • Appoint a devil’s advocate to challenge majority views
  • Hypothesize rival scenarios and consider alternative intentions
  • Reconsider decisions after a waiting period
  • Note: some researchers question effectiveness; e.g., a devil’s advocate may be ignored if perceived as role-playing.

The Interface Model: The Interface of Me and Them

• Burton & Dimbleby (1996) present a model to explain interpersonal dynamics underpinning group behavior. The diagram depicts an interface between the individual (me) and the group (them), emphasizing how needs and self-concept interact with social pressures and norms to shape behavior.
• Key features:
  • The bottom half centers on the individual’s needs, motivation, self-concept, and personal role perceptions.
  • The top half focuses on group expectations, social norms, and audience feedback (how others perceive and respond to the individual).
  • Interaction is iterative: individuals enact roles, receive feedback (from self and others), and redefine who they are within the group context.
• This model helps explain why people conform, resist, or adapt in group settings and highlights the complexity of group dynamics beyond simple cause-and-effect explanations.

Exhibit: Illustrative Tools and Case Examples

• Exhibit 16-2: Surgical Safety Checklist (WHO) – A written formal rule of conduct that guides surgical teams through pre-, intra-, and post-operative tasks and communications. Demonstrated to reduce postoperative complications and mortality by over 30 ext{ ext%} in a global population (Haynes et al., 2009):
  • Before induction of anesthesia: verify patient identity, procedure, site, consent; confirm equipment/medication readiness; assess risks.
  • Before skin incision: confirm team introductions by name/role; confirm patient identity and procedure; verify antibiotic prophylaxis timing; address anticipated critical events with team.
  • Before patient leaves operating room: verbal confirmation of procedure name, counts of instruments/sponges, specimen labeling, and recovery/management considerations.
• Exhibit 16-3: HealthSouth case summary – Five HealthSouth officers charged with conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud. The narrative details how the “family” meetings and the manipulation of financial records were used to inflate earnings and asset values. This case illustrates how group dynamics and a tight-knit culture can be exploited to justify unethical behavior.
• Exhibit 16-1: Benne & Sheats’s Functional Roles of Group Members (summary chart) – Task roles, maintenance roles, and individual roles; definitions and typical examples of behaviors associated with each role.
• Exhibit 16-2 (Belbin’s nine roles table): Details the Belbin roles and how they align with task, maintenance, and individual dimensions; helps explain how different people contribute to team performance.

Group Norms — Enforcement and Socialization in Practice

• Group norms are learned through interaction and socialization; they establish “standards” by which behavior is judged.
• When norms are violated, groups may try to bring the deviant back into line; if persuasion fails, sanctions may include loss of status, social rejection, or dismissal from the group.
• Socialization explains why unwritten norms become internalized: members begin to conform to the group’s standard as their own; this contributes to sustained group identity and cohesion.

Discussion Questions (from the chapter)

• Define the study of group dynamics and discuss why it is important to today’s managers.
• Describe the four characteristics that define a group and provide examples of nongroups and groups.
• Explain what is meant by "group interaction."
• Discuss how group interactions can be measured.
• Discuss why people join groups and what sustains their membership.
• Explain the importance of the various roles that members assume in groups.
• Discuss how group norms are formed and sustained within groups.
• Explain how group cohesiveness is developed and sustained.
• Discuss why conformity can inhibit a group’s performance.
• Explain what behavior is displayed by a group that is engaging in groupthink.

Exercises

• Exercise 16-1: Form small groups of 4–5 and discuss whether employees often act as group members rather than as individuals. Share experiences of conforming pressures and deviant behavior within groups.
• Exercise 16-2: Use the worksheet "Be the Best We Can Be Team Norms" to discuss and develop team norms that clarify expected behaviors.
• Exercise 16-3: Analyze the level of group cohesiveness in one of your groups.

Connections to Foundational Principles and Real-World Relevance

• Group dynamics concepts connect to foundational organizational behavior principles: motivation (Maslow; Equity Theory), leadership (task vs. socioemotional leadership), communication (IPA), and social psychology (conformity, groupthink).
• Real-world relevance in health care:
  • Groups and teams are central to safe and effective care delivery (operating rooms, disease management, patient safety committees, ethics committees, trauma teams, disaster response).
  • The trend toward integrated care and virtual teams requires managers to understand how to form cohesive units and avoid dysfunctional dynamics like social loafing and groupthink.
• Ethical and practical implications:
  • Groupthink can lead to dangerous medical or organizational decisions if harmony is prioritized over critical thinking.
  • Accountability and transparent processes help mitigate social loafing and ensure that each member is contributing meaningfully.
  • Written procedures (e.g., surgical safety checklists) demonstrate how formal norms can improve outcomes and reduce risk.

Key References (selected)

• Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction Process Analysis: A method for the study of small groups. University of Chicago Press.
• Benne, K., & Sheats, P. (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social Issues.
• Belbin, R. M. (1981, 1993, 2004). Team roles at work / Management teams: Why they succeed or fail.
• Feldman, D. C. (1984). The development and enforcement of group norms. Academy of Management Review.
• Haynes, A. B., et al. (2009). A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality. New England Journal of Medicine.
• Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values.
• Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink. Houghton Mifflin.
• Katz, J. R., & Smith, D. K. (1993). The wisdom of teams: Creating the high performance organization.
• Katz, J. R. (1993). Belbin-style roles and team effectiveness.
• Tubbs, S. L. (2001). A systems approach to small group interaction.
• Turner, J. (1987). Rediscovering the social group.
• Turners and colleagues on group dynamics in health care contexts.

(Note: Additional references cited in the chapter provide empirical studies and foundational theories related to group dynamics, norms, cohesiveness, conformity, and group decision-making.)