Groups & Teams

Groups & Teams 

Group: two or more people, interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve particular objectives 

Formal groups: organization structure with designated work assignments 

• Behaviors are stipulated by and directed toward organizational goals 

• Ex. Airline flight crew 

Informal groups: neither formally structured or organizationally determined 

• Natural formations in work environment due to need for social contact 

• Ex. Lunch buddies 

People join groups for... 

• Security 

• Status 

• Self-esteem 

• Affiliation 

• Power 

• Goal achievement 

Stages of group development (stage model) 

1. Forming: period of uncertainty 

2. Storming: period of intragroup conflict, jockey for roles 

3. Norming: cohesiveness, differences are resolved, and expectations align 

4. Performing: fully functional, focus on task at hand 

5. Adjourning: optional: disbandment 

Punctuated-Equilibrium Model: characterizes groups as exhibiting long periods of inertia interspersed with brief revolutionary changes triggered primarily by their members awareness of time and deadlines 

• Teams develop through the sudden formation, maintenance, and sudden revision of a “framework for performance” 

• Common for temporary groups with a deadline 

Phase 1: 

• Direction is set 

• State of intertia – direction is fixed 

Transition: initiates major changes 

• Burst of change – drop old/adopt new patterns 

• Sets up the stage for phase 2 

Phase 2: 2^nd state of intertia 

• Last meeting accelerates activity 

• Execution for final closure 

The relationship between the two models is complementary. They co-exist. The punctuated equilibrium model focuses on how a team works on a specific task with deadlines, whereas the stage models focus on the overall development of the team. 

Group properties: work groups have properties that shape the behavior of individuals in the group 

• Group roles: sets of expected behavior patterns 

• Group norms: acceptable standards of behavior 

• Group status: socially defined position or rank 

• Group size: number of people in the group 

• Group cohesiveness: degree to which members are attracted to each other 

Group roles: a set of expected behavior patterns attributed to an individual in a group 

• Role perception: individual view of how to act in a given situation (how we perceive) 

• Role expectation: how others believe one should act in a given situation (how others perceive) 

• Role conflict: when an individual is confronted with divergent role expectations 

Dark side of group roles: 

Zimbardo’s prison experiment: randomly assigned students as prisoners or guards, all individuals assimilated into the “typical role” of these positions 

• Guards become abusive toward the prisoners 

• Prisoners become submissive 

• Guards began to think of the prisoners are dangerous 

• Personality: individuals can rapidly assimilate new roles very different from their inherent personalities 

Group norms: an acceptable standard of behavior within a group that is shared by group members 

• Norms can influence individual behavior by providing explicit cues about the group’s expectations 

• How hard members should work 

• How to do the job 

• What level of tardiness is appropriate 

• Examples: do golfers speak when a different player is putting? Dress code, professional behavior, etc.  

Dark side of norms: 

Conformity: adjusting one’s behavior to align with the group 

• Individuals conform to the important groups to which they belong or hope to belong 

• However, all groups do not impose equal conformity pressures on their members 

• Important groups are referred to as reference groups. 

• Ex. The video of the woman standing up, brain games. 

Has time altered the validity of these findings of nearly 50 years ago, and are they generalizable across culture? 

• There have been changes in the level of conformity over time. Levels of conformity have steadily declined. 

• Findings are culture-bound. 

• Conformity to social norms is higher in collectivist cultures than in individualistic cultures. 

The reference group is characterized as... 

• The one where the person is aware of the others 

• The person defines himself or herself as a member or would like to be a member. 

• And the person feels that the group members are significant to him/her. 

Group status: socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members 

• Status characteristic theory: status is derived from one of three sources: 

• Power to influence others 

• Ability to contribute to a group's goals 

• Personal characteristics 

Potential dark-side of status: 

• High status people are more abusive and critical 

• Status differences may inhibit diversity of ideas and creativity 

• Lower status individuals are less active participants 

Group size: the number of people in the group 

• Completing tasks; small is better 

• Solving problems; large is better 

Dark side of group size: 

Social loafing: the tendency for people to expend less effort when working collectively than when working individually 

Ringelmann effect: when people are in groups, individuals slacken 

• Max Ringelmann has people pulling on a rope (Tug of War) 

How managers can reduce social loafing: 

• Set group goals 

• Increase intergroup competition 

• Use peer evaluation 

• Reward individual contributions 

Group cohesiveness: the degree to which group members are attracted to each other and are motivated to remain in the group 

• If performance norms are high, cohesive groups are more productive 

• If performance norms are low, cohesive groups are less productive 

What can managers do to increase cohesiveness? 

• Make groups smaller 

• Encourage agreement with group goals 

• Increase the time members spend together 

• Increase group status and barriers to entry 

• Stimulate intergroup competition 

• Give group, rather than individual, rewards 

• Physically isolate the group