INTRODUCTION
Individual members of groups bring with them certain individual
characteristics that may have an influence on group behavior. An individual’s
typical behavioral patterns such as how he or she reacts to others, and his
available skill and abilities will have an impact on the overall performance o f
a group. The discussion of individual characteristics and group behavior
includes four main components: 1) biographical and physical characteristics, 2)
abilities and intelligence, 3) personality and 4) expectations.
The structure of the group provides norms, social ranking
influence, and the position or role that each member occupies in the group. The
following components of the group structure are important: 1) group
composition, 2) norms, 3) status, 4) emergent leaders 5) role definition and 6)
group cohesiveness. Research studies have shown that conformity to group norms
are a function of four factors; personality of the group member; situational
factors; stimulus factors; and intra-group relations. Individuals conform to group
norms generally in one of the three ways: conformity, rebellion or creative individualism.
GROUP MEMBER ATTRIBUTES
A group’s potential level of performance is, to a large extent
dependent on the attributes that its members individually bring to the group.
There are two attributes: i) knowledge, skills and abilities of an individual
and ii) his personality characteristics.
KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITIES
Intellectual abilities, skills and abilities are predicting the
group’s performance more confidently. It is reported that individuals whose
abilities are crucial for attaining the group’s tasks tend to be more involved
in group activity and more likely to emerge as the group leaders. Further, they
are satisfied if their talents are effectively used by the group. Intellectual
ability and task relevant ability have both been found to be related to overall
group performance. Group performance is not merely the summation of its
individual member’s abilities. However, these abilities set the possibilities
for what member can do and how effectively they perform in a group.
PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS
There is a high level of relationship between personality traits,
group attitudes and behavior. It is reported that personality traits tend to
have a positive connotation in our culture and tend to positively related to
group productivity, morale and cohesiveness. These include traits such as
sociability, self-reliance and independence. The magnitude of the effect of any
single characteristic is small, but all together the consequences for group behavior
are of major significance. Therefore, the personality characteristics of group members
play an important part in determining group behavior.
GROUP STRUCTURES FORMAL LEADERSHIP
Formal leader of the group:
He is its principal representative and is the one individual who
can legitimately exert formal influence on the activities of the group. The
leader is responsible for the direction and goal accomplishment of the group
and can reward or punish individual member when they do not comply with the
directions, orders or rules of the group. Without a leader, the group will
never have direction and spirit to proceed further. Due to this, an
organization supports the leaders influence, and ensures that the leader has
the power to make the group members comply with directives.
Informal Group Leaders:
Informal group leaders generally are individuals who are respected
by other group members and who have acquired special status. The informal group
leaders generally:
i) Aids the group in directing its activities toward goal
accomplishment
ii) Embodies the values of the group
iii) Acts for the group in presenting their viewpoint when
interacting with management or other groups
iv) Facilitates the activities of the group by initiating group
actions and assisting in resolving group conflict.
The informal group leadership role can and often does change from
person to person, depending on the particular conditions that exist. An
individual who is not able to maintain the respect, status, and prestige of the
group can be replaced by others who embody the needed characteristics. To
remain an informal leader person must have the necessary qualifications,
knowledge, and skills needed to aid and guide the group toward goal
accomplishment.
ROLES
Role refers to a set of expected behavior patterns attributed to
someone occupying a given position in a social unit. Roles are classified into
three ways:
Expected Role:
It refers to the expectations of supervisors towards their
subordinates on the type of behavior or actions in their job. This expected
role can be specified by giving a detailed job description, position, title or
by other directions from the organizations.
Perceived Role:
This concerns the set of activities or behaviors of the group that
an individual believes he or she should do. Most of the time, the perceived
role corresponds to the expected role. Many factors may be present in a
situation that can distort the individual’s perception and thus make the
perceived role inaccurate.
Enacted Role:
This refers to the way in which the individual group member
actually behaves. The enacted role is generally dependent on the perceived role
If there is any differences exist between or among these roles, a considerable
level of role ambiguity or role conflict exists. Role ambiguity is the lack of
clarity regarding job duties, authority and responsibility that the individual
perceives in his role. It can be caused by a number of factors such as lack of
clear job description, occupational levels with complex set of duties, lack of
training, experience and clear job responsibilities, lack of self confidence
and other personalized factors. Role conflict occurs when multiple demands and
directions from one or more individuals create uncertainty in the worker’s mind
concerning what should be done, when or for whom. Employees must receive
directions or expectations only from one source. But in recent times, the
employees have multiple roles and therefore can receive multiple directions.
Two different types of role conflict exist; i) intra-role conflict and ii)
inter-role conflict.
Intra-role conflict: It is created by many
different directives sent simultaneously to some one occupying one role, making
it impossible for the individual to satisfy all directives at the same time.
For example: Production supervisor experiences role conflict by getting conflicting
demands from four sources such as i) production manager is demanding greater
emphasis on steady production levels and attention to cost control ii) Sales manager
asking not only for a greater variety of products, but also different qualities
of products for select customers ii) Maintenance managers demanding him to
shutdown the plant to do repair work. iv) Workers want more overtime, better
working conditions and less interference in their work from supervisors.
Inter-role conflict: It is created by many
simultaneous roles presenting conflicting expectations. It exists when an
individual finds that compliance with one role requirement may make it more
difficult the compliance with another. At the extreme, it would include
situations in which two or more role expectations are mutually contradictory.
All of us to face role conflict at various times. The critical
issue is how the different role expectations imposed by organizational
requirements affect our behavior. Certainly they increase internal tension and
frustrations. There are a number of behavioral responses to resolve such
conflicts by following the organizational rules, regulations and procedures that
govern organizational activities. Other behavioral responses may include
withdrawal, staffing, negotiations, etc.
NORMS:
Norms act as standards of behavior and performance. Norms can be
described as shared belief among group members as to what behaviors are
appropriate if one desires to be a part of and belong to the group. It refers
to acceptable standards of behavior that are shared by the group members. Norms
direct employees on what they ought and ought not to do under certain
circumstance. When agree to and accepted by the group, norms act as means of
influencing the behavior of group members with minimum of external controls.
Norms become unwritten rules, or implicitly understood codes of
conduct for group members. Interestingly, norms become explicit only when they
are broken. For instance, if the norms of a group include punctuality in
attendance, and if group members come late, the other members are likely to
react to this behavior in several subtle or not so subtle ways. Some of the
types of norms are as given below:
i) Performance related norms: Setting targets such as number of
units produced per day, number of calls attended etc will be performance
related norms
ii) Non-performance related norms: Formal dress code, visiting
office during weekends, accepting transfers to distant locations etc, will be
non performance related norms.
iii) Informal Social Arrangements: These norms come from informal
work group and primarily regulate social interactions within the group. These
norms influence friendships on and off the job, whom group members eat lunch
with, and social activities.
iv) Allocation of Resources. This is related to fixing pay,
assignment of difficult jobs, and allocation of new tools and equipments etc.
v) Norm Conformity: An important issue facing all the managers of
group is the degree to which employees conform to group norms. There are certain
factors which strongly influence members to conform to group norms. They are as
follows:
i) Personal factors: It is reported that more
intelligent individuals are less likely to conform than are less intelligent
individuals and that the more authoritarian an individual is , the less likely
that he or she will conform to group norms.
ii) Situational factors: The size, structure of the
group, social contexts etc strongly influence the norm conformity. As the size
of the group increase beyond certain limit say more than 10-12, the conformity
to norm is likely to decrease.
iii) Stimulus Factors: The more ambiguous the
stimulus, the greater will be the conformity to the group norms. The
uncertainty will force the members to work together to minimize its level and
attain clarity in the work roles.
iv) Intra-group relationship: The types of
intra-group relationships such as the kind and extent of group pressure
exerted, the rate of success achieved in reaching group goals, the degree of
identification with group goals etc. strongly influence members to conform to
the group norms.
Norms are thus leant by members through observation, and through
reinforcement (being rewarded when one conforms to valued norms and punished
when one violates valued norms), if an individual consistently transgresses the
norms, ignoring the signals sent out by members, the worst punishment will
follow. He or she will sooner be totally ignored and devalued as a member of
the group, thus losing status in the group.
Establishing Norms
Norms are developed based on the following four ways:
i) Explicit statements made by a group member: Ensuring that no
personal telephone calls will be entertained during the office hours and
getting acceptance from all the employees will help to create an order
ii) Critical events in the group’s history: The accident occurred
to a visitor of factory premises due to his negligence will help to enforce
certain guidelines and becomes norms to every one.
iii) Primacy: The initial behavior pattern exhibited by the group
will become a norm and difficult to change.
iv) Carry-over behavior from the past situations: New members
expectations, experiences will help reformulate or revise certain norms to meet
the current requirements.
The advantages of group- norms:
Enforcing group norms will help the organization in so many ways.
Some of the advantages are
i) It facilitates the group’s survival
ii) It increases the predictability of group member’s behavior
iii) It reduces embarrassing interpersonal problems for group
member
iv) It allows members to express the central values of the group
and clarify what is distinctive about the group’s identity.
Groups attempt to perform at a level equal to their established
performance norms. The degree of socializations will affect not only the level
of performance of individual group members, but whether the individual will
remain as a group member.
STATUS:
Status is defined as a social ranking within a group and is
assigned to an individual on the basis of position in the group or individual
characteristics. Status can be a function of the title of individual, wage or
salary level, work schedule mobility to interaction with others with or outside
the group, or seniority. Status also refers to the importance and reference that
people give to others. People at higher levels of the organizations and those
who have accomplished much are ascribed or bestowed higher status. People
perceive those high status persons as having more control, being more competent
and as having more influence over group decision than low status individuals.
Members having charisma, a high level of experts and access to the
organization’s resources will be accorded higher status than those who do not
have them. Demographic factors such as gender, age, educational level and
length of service in the organization will have an effect on the status enjoyed
by the member of a group. Group characterized by high status congruence tend to
perform better than the groups in which there is status incongruence,
Formal and Informal Status:
Formal Status: The hierarchical position, job title, perks
assigned to these positions is formally assigned to the job holders. By virtue
of holding such position, a person is viewed as high.
Informal Status: Status may be informally acquired by such
characteristics as education, age, gender, skill or experience.
Status Equity: Maintaining status hierarchy
in equitable manner is essential to keep the moral of the employees. When
inequity is perceived, it creates disequilibrium that results in various types
of corrective behavior. This is noticed in such occasions – promotions, overseas
job assignments etc.
Status and Culture: Different cultures assign
different weightings to the status. French people are highly status conscious
than Latin Americans. Status for Latin Americans and Asians tends to be derived
from family position and formal roles held in organizations.
SIZE:
The size of the group is an important determinant of overall
effectiveness of the group. But it is depending upon the objective of the
group. If the group is interested to generate creative solutions, the larger
the size of the group will be more ideal. If the group is interested to get
more cohesiveness and try to get quick output, the smaller the size will be
more ideal. Groups of approximately seven members tend to be more effective for
taking quick action. The size of the group is linked with social loafing.
Social Loafing: It is the tendency of group
members to do less than they are capable of individually, resulting in an
inverse relationship between group size and individual performance. The more
the number of employees assigned to do a task, the lesser will be the amount of
their effort than they normally tend to carry out in performing their tasks individually.
For instance, in group rope pulling task, it is expected that the groups’
effort would be equal to the sum of the efforts of individuals with in the
group. That is, three people pulling together should exert three times as much
pull on the rope as one person.
The result, on the contrary, showed that three members in a group
exerted only two times the average individual performance, lesser than the
individual level effort. The primary reason is the diffusion of responsibility
as the results of group cannot be attributed to any single person.
COMPOSITION AND DIVERSITY:
Group composition refers to the degree to which members of a group
share a common demographic attribute such as age, gender, race, educational or
length of service in the organization and the effect of this attribute on
performance, satisfaction and turnover. The composition of a group may be an
important predictor of productivity, satisfaction, and turnover. Group
composition will be based on homogenous or heterogeneous characteristics of the
members.
Homogenous Groups:
In homogeneous groups the compatibility with respect to needs, motives
and personalities has been found to be conducive to group’s effectiveness
because it facilitates group cooperation and communication. Although the
homogeneity tends to reduce the potential for conflict, it also can create an
overabundance of conformity, resulting in unproductive group activity. Groups
composed of individuals with similar and compatible characteristics may be
expected to behave in similar ways and will perform more effectively on tasks
that are routine and less effectively on tasks that are complex and require a
diversity of problem solving approaches.
Heterogeneous Groups:
In heterogeneous groups, the variation in individual
characteristics help to produce high performance levels and a high quality of
problem solving because members stimulate the intellectual abilities of one
another. The heterogeneity of individual characteristics in such groups can
create situations in which the potential for conflict is great. Heterogeneous
groups can be expected to perform more effectively on tasks that are complex
and require creative or innovative approaches to the problem, but less effectively
on tasks that are routine and require a high level of individual conformity and
coordination. For example, a group of research scientists are attempting to
develop a new product of petrochemical. The nature and complexity of the task
requires a diversity of talents, knowledge, and creative approaches which is
provided more effectively by a heterogeneously composed group.
Homogeneous groups perform well on tasks that are uniform and
routine. Homogeneity, while reducing the potential for dysfunctional conflict
to arise, may be detrimental to performance if there is an overemphasis on
conformity. Heterogeneous groups perform well on tasks that are complex and
non-routine and that require a diversity of talents and view points. However,
heterogeneity can create conflict.
GROUP PROCESS
SYNERGY
Synergy refers to the cumulative effect of two or more substances
which is different from the individual summation of those substances. It
connotes the creation of a whole which is greater than the sum of the
individual parts. For example, synergy is obtained when 2 +2 is not merely 4, but
can be made to add up to more than 4. For example, three engineers are given
the tasks of solving a problem. The ideas generated jointly by these three
engineers will be richer and more creative than if the three engineers
individually generated their own ideas without any interaction among them. The
ideas generated jointly will be better than the individually generated ideas
because the three now jointly and creatively explore several different
alternatives, discuss the pros and cons and develop integrated thoughts which
are more innovative, thus arriving at a much more powerful solutions than what
they would have been able to achieve individually. The group has developed
synergy by merely interacting with each other using their combined wisdom to
generate integrated solutions. This is positive synergy.
Social loafing represents a negative synergy where the whole is
less than the sum of the parts where individuals are likely to reduce their
effort due to diffusion of responsibility.
Social Facilitation Effect: The mere presence of
others also affects the performance of individual. It reported that the
presence of others tend to improve performance when the tasks are relatively
simple and well rehearsed. This Positive effect is termed as Social Facilitation
Effect.
Social inhibition effect: This
leads to a detrimental effect which occurs when an individual is asked to
perform a complex task with which he is unfamiliar or in which he is unskilled
to do any work.
GROUP COHESION:
Cohesion refers to the extent of unity in the group and is
reflected in the members’ conformity to the norms of the group, feelings of
attraction for each other, and wanting to be co-members of the group.
Attraction, cohesion and conforming to norms are all intertwined. The more the
members feel attracted to the group, the greater will be the group cohesion.
The greater the cohesion, the greater the influence of group members to persuade
one another to conform to the group norms. The greater the conformity, the greater
the identification of the members with the group, and the greater the group cohesion.
Cohesive groups work together to achieve the group goals. They can be considered
as valuable assets to the organization if the group’s goals coincide with the organization’s
goals.
Factors increasing Cohesiveness: The
following factors can facilitate to increase the cohesiveness of the work
group.
i) Agreement on Group Goals: If the group agrees
on the purpose and direction of its activities, this will serve to bind the
group together and structure interaction patterns towards successful goal
accomplishment
ii) Frequency of Interaction: When group member
have the opportunity to interact frequently with each other, the probability
for closeness to develop will increase. Managers can provide opportunities for
increased group interaction by calling frequent formal and informal meetings,
providing a common meetings place or physically designing the facilities so
that group members are within sight of one another
iii) Personal Attractiveness: Cohesiveness is
enhanced when members are attractive to one another if mutual trust and support
already exists. Personal attraction also helps group members to overcome obstacles
to goal accomplishment and personal growth and development.
iv) Inter-group Competition: Competition with
other groups, both written and external to the organization is a mechanism that
acts to bring groups closer together for attaining a common purpose.
v) Favorable Evaluation: If a group has performed in
an outstanding manner, some recognition for its performance by management
serves to elevate the prestige of the group in the eyes of the group members
and other members of the group. Favorable evaluation helps make group members
feel proud about being members of the group.
vi) Group Size: As the size of the group
increases, the frequency of interaction each member has with other group
members decreases, thus decreasing the probability that cohesiveness will
develop. Past studies have shown the groups of four to six members provide the
best opportunity for interaction.
vii) Pleasant experiences with the group: When
group members are attracted to each other or there is a full trust and
cooperation, interaction may become a pleasant experience resulting in high
level of cohesiveness in the group.
viii) Lack of Domination: When one or few members
dominate the group, cohesiveness cannot adequately develop. Such behavior can
create smaller “cliques” within the group or identify individual members as
isolates or deviates.
ix) Gender of Members: It is reported that women
tend to have greater cohesion than men. A possible reason is that women are
more likely to be feeling types than thinking types.
x) Previous Success: If a group has a history of
success, it builds an espirit de corps that attracts and unites members.
Successful organizations find it easier to attract and hire new employees than
unsuccessful ones.
xi) Humor: Humor has been linked to increased
cohesion in several studies. It is reported that the greater the cohesion, the
greater the influence of the group over the behavior of members and
subsequently group performance. As groups are composed of individuals who are
attracted to the goals of the group and to each other, one would expect to find
a strong relationship between cohesiveness and group performance.
The major difference between highly cohesive and low cohesive
groups would be how closely members conformed to the group norms. Further, the
group performance would be influenced not only by cohesion, but by the level of
group norms.
Group Decision Making
Groups offer excellent techniques for performing many of the steps
in the decision making process. They are a source of both breath and depth of
input for information gathering. If the group is composed of individuals with
diverse backgrounds, the alternatives generated should be more extensive and
the analysis will be more critical.
Strengths of Group Decision-making:
The following aspects identified the main advantages that groups
offer over individuals in the making of decisions.
i) More information and knowledge: By aggregating the resources of
several individuals, the group brings more input into the decision process.
ii) Increased diversity of views: Group brings heterogeneity to
the decisionmaking process and this opens up the opportunity for more
approaches and alternatives to be considered
iii) Increased acceptance of a solution: The group acceptance
facilitates higher satisfaction among those employees required to implement it.
iv) Increased legitimacy: The group decision making process is
consistent with demographic ideals and therefore may be perceived as being more
legitimate than decisions made by an individual.
Weakness of group decision making:
Some of the main disadvantages are:
i) Time-consuming: It takes time to assemble a group.
ii) Pressures to conform: The desire by group members to be
accepted and considered as an asset to the group can result in squashing any
overt disagreement, thus encouraging conformity among viewpoints.
iii) Domination by the few: Few people will try to dominate the
group discussion.
If such people are happened to be mediocre, the group overall
effectiveness will suffer.
iv) Ambiguous responsibility: In group decision, the
responsibility of any single member is reduced.
Group Think and Group Shift
GroupThink
Groupthink refers to a situation where group pressure for
conformity deters a group from critically evaluating unusual, unpopular or
minority views. It is phenomenon that occurs when group members become so
enamored of seeking concurrence that the norm for consensus overrides the
realistic evaluation of alternative course of action and the full expression of
deviant, minority or unpopular views. It describes deterioration in an individual’s
mental efficiency, reality testing and moral judgment, as a result of group pressures.
The results of groupthink are often such that poor quality
decisions are taken and inappropriate responses are made to situational needs.
The following are the antecedents of Groupthink:
i) Excessive group cohesiveness
ii) Insulation of group from external information and influence
iii) Lack of impartial leadership and of norms encouraging proper
procedures
iv) Ideological homogeneity of members
v) High stress from external threat and task complexity
These antecedents are relating to basic structural faults in the
group and to the immediate decision making contexts.
The following are some of the symptoms of groupthink:
i) Feelings of invulnerability and unanimity
ii) Unquestioning belief that the group must be right
iii) Tendency to ignore or discredit information contrary to
group’s position
iv) Direct pressure exerted on dissidents to bring them into line
v) Stereotyping of out-group members
vi) Ignore external information
vii) Overestimate its own abilities and capabilities to make good
decision
viii) Rationalize or reject data that tend to disconfirm its
original views and judgments
ix) Apply direct pressures on those who momentarily express doubts
about any of the group’s shared views
x) Those who have doubts or different view point keep silent about
misgivings and even minimizing to themselves the importance of their doubts.
In a group where the groupthink phenomenon operates, members
constantly monitor and censor themselves to ensure that they are going along
with the group’s opinion and not deviating by expressing a different viewpoint.
Too much cohesion has the built-in danger of group member falling into the trap
of group think, which in turn, compromises good decision-making, especially in
complex situations.
Group Shift
It is reported that group is willing to take greater risks than
when the same members make decision individually. In case more financial commitment
is involved, individuals tend to be very cautious and make conservative
decisions. However, when the same kinds of decisions are made by groups, the
decisions made are less conservative. Groups feel more at ease and comfort in
making riskier decisions. Higher risk taking behaviors in a group are probably
a function of the responsibilities for the consequences of the decision making
shared by all the group members rather than one individual assuming more burdens
by himself. This phenomenon for groups to take greater risks while making critical
decisions when compared to individual decision making is known as the Group shift.
The most plausible explanation of the shift towards risk seems to
be that the group diffuses responsibility. Group decisions free any singly
member from accountability for the group’s final choice. Greater risk can be
taken because, even if the decision fails, no one member can be held wholly
responsible.
No comments:
Post a Comment