Group & Team Work

8/9/2019 Group & Team Work

1/35

GROUP & TEAM WORK


2/35

Group - definitions:A collection of individuals whose existence as acollection is rewarding to the individuals.

A set of individuals who share a common fate,

who are interdependent in the sense that an

event which affects one member is likely to

affect all.

As two or more persons who are interacting

with one another in such a manner that eachperson influences and is influenced by each

other person.


3/35

Why people join groups?

To satisfy individual needs

Proximity, contact, interaction

Cultural & personal similarities,

need compatibility

Activities of group are rewarding

One values the group and the group goal


4/35

Groups

Are ubiquitous

Influence the productivity of

employees

Influence an employees perceptions

& attitudes

Aid an individual in satisfyingunfulfilled needs

Facilitate communication


5/35

GROUPS

PRIMARY SECONDARY

FORMAL INFORMAL

REFERENCE INGROUP & OUTGROUP

PRIMARY GROUPS="THOSE CHARACTERIZED BY INTIMATE

FACE-TO-FACE ASSOCIATION AND COOPERATION. THEY AREPRIMARY IN SEVERAL SENSES, BUT CHIEFLY IN THAT THEY

ARE FUNDAMENTAL IN FORMING THE SOCIAL NATURE AND

IDEALS OF THE INDIVIDUAL. THE RESULT OF INTIMATE

ASSOCIATION ... IS A CERTAIN FUSION OF INDIVIDUALITIES IN

A COMMON WHOLE, SO THAT ONE'S VERY SELF, FOR MANYPURPOSES AT LEAST, IS THE COMMON LIFE AND PURPOSE OF

THE GROUP"

-CHARLESH.COOLEY (1909)

[FERDINAND TONNIES - GEMEINSCHAFT: CLOSE COMMUNAL

RELATIONSHIP]


6/35

THREE ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS

OF PRIMARY GROUPS:

CLOSE PHYSICAL PROXIMITY OF GROUP MEMBERS,

SMALLNESS OF THE GROUP,AND

DURABILITY OF THE BOND

FIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIMARYRELATIONS:IDENTITY OF ENDS (EACH PARTY PRESUMES AS ONE

OF HIS ENDS THE WELFARE OF OTHER)

INTERPRETATION (EACH PARTY PURSUES AS ONE OFHIS ENDS THE WELFARE OF THE OTHER)

RELATIONSHIP IS AN END IN ITSELF

RELATIONSHIP IS PERSONAL (PERSON IS MORE

IMPORTANT)

RELATIONSHIP IS SPONTANEOUS


7/35

PRIMARY GROUPS:

FRIENDS FAMILY NEIGHBOURHOOD

TEACHER PLAY GROUP WORKTEAM

SECONDARY GROUPS =SECONDARY GROUPS CAN BE ROUGHLY

DEFINED AS THE OPPOSITE OF EVERYTHING OF PRIMARY

GROUPS. THE SECONDARY GROUP COVERS SUCH A WIDE AREA

THAT NO TWO OF ITS MEMBERS NEED LIVE IN CLOSE

PROXIMITY, AND IT IS SO LARGE THAT ALL OF ITS MEMBERSCOULD NOT POSSIBLY KNOWONE ANOTHER PERSONALLY.

ALTHOUGH IT MAY HAVE VERY LONG DURATION, THE

PERSONAL RELATIONS OF ITS MEMBERS MAY BE BRIEF.

[FERDINAND TONNIES - GESSELLSCHAFT: ORGANISED

IMPERSONAL RELATIONSHIP]

SECONDARY GROUPS:

CUSTOMER- BANK CLERK AUTHOR-READER

PERFORMER-SPECTATOR ANNOUNCER-LISTENER

PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION


8/35

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRIMARY AND

SECONDARY GROUPS:

PRIMARY GROUP SE CONDARY GROUP

SMALL BIG

FACE TO FACE TOUCH AND GO

SENTIMENTS & MOTIVES CONTRACTS / RULES

INTIMATE PERSONAL IMPERSONALRELATIONSHIP ACQUAINTANCE

LOYALTY & DEVOTION ALLEGIANCE & IDENTITY

SYMPATHY & MUTUAL FORMALITY AND

IDENTIFICATION COMPULSION

THE REAL DIFFERENCE RELATES NOT TO THE

GROUPS AS SUCH BUT TO THE KINDS OF

RELATIONSHIPSTHAT CONSTITUTE THE GROUP

STRUCTURE


9/35

FORMAL = ESTABLISHED UNDERLEGAL / FORMAL AUTHORITY TO

ACHIEVE SPECIFIC END RESULT e.g.

TASK FORCE

INFORMAL = ATTITUDES AND

VALUES HELD IN COMMON, FACE

TO FACE


10/35

Conditions under which Groups tend tobecome more cohesive:

Physical proximity

Same or similar work

Homogeneity

Personality (Like mindedness)

Easy flow of communicationSize (12 15)


11/35

Group building or maintenance roles:Member functions focuses on those contributions

which have for their purpose the building of group-centered attitudes or orientation among the members of

a group.

Members / Leader of the group perform SEVEN roles in

successive contributions:

Encourager

Harmonizer (mediates the differences in the group)

Compromiser

Gatekeeper (keeps the communication channel open)

Standard setter (express standards for the group)

Group observer-commentator

Follower


12/35

GROUP DYNAMICS (KURT LEWIN) SUGGEST

THAT AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO SPECIFYCONDITIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL BEHAVIOUR,

IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE

CONDITIONS THAT INFLUENCE THE

BEHAVIOUR OF THE GROUP.

GROUP DYNAMICS IMPLIES THAT GROUPS ARE

CHARACTERISED BYON-GOING CHANGEAND

THAT THE MORE STABLE CHARACTERSTICS OFTHE GROUP CAN ONLY BE UNDERSTOOD AND

MEASURED BY THE ON-GOING ACTIVITIES OF

THE GROUPS.


13/35

GROUP DYNAMICS

THERE IS NO AGREEMENT AS TOWHAT EXACTLY

IS MEANT BY GROUP DYNAMICS.

GROUP DYNAMICS IS CONCERNEDWITH THE

INTERACTIONS AND FORCESBETWEEN GROUPMEMBERS IN A SOCIAL SITUATION.WHEN THE

CONCEPT IS APPLIED TO THE STUDY OF OB, THE

FOCUS IS ON THE DYNAMICS OF MEMBERS OF

FORMAL OR INFORMAL GROUPS IN THEORGANISATION.


14/35

KURT LEWINPOPULARIZED THIS TERM[GROUP DYNAMICS] IN 1930's. ONE VIEW

IS THAT GROUP DYNAMICS DESCRIBES

HOWA GROUP SHOULD BE ORGANIZED

AND CONDUCTED. DEMOCRATICLEADERSHIP, MEMBER PARTICIPATION

AND OVERALL COOPERATION ARE

STRESSED

.


15/35

ANOTHER VIEW OF GROUP DYNAMICS IS THAT IT

CONSISTS OF A SET OF TECHNIQUES. HERE, ROLE

PLAYING, BRAINSTORMING, EADERLESS GROUPS,SENSITIVITY TRAINING, TA, AND THE JOHARI

WINDOW ARE EQUATED WITH GROUP

DYNAMICS.

A THIRD VIEWISCLOSEST TOLEWIN'SORIGINAL

CONCEPTION. GROUP DYNAMICS IS VIEWED

FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE INTERNAL

NATURE OF GROUPS, HOW DO THEY FORM,

THEIR STRUCTURE, PROCESSES AND HOW THEY

AFFECT INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS, OTHER GROUPS

AND

THE ORGANISATION.


16/35

ISSUES IN GROUP DYNAMICS :

PRECONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE NATURE OFTHE GROUPS

PROBLEMS OF DEFINING THE FIELD OF

STUDYTHE QUESTION OF AN APPROPRIATE

THEORETICAL ORIENTATION

THE PROBLEM OF THE PROPER METHODSOF STUDYING GROUPS

THE RELATION OF GROUP DYNAMICS TO THE

LARGER SOCIETY


17/35

Stages in Group Development

ORIENTATION CONFLICT COHESION EFFECTIVESTRUCTURE

DEFINING GOALS,

FEELING

OTHERS, SIZING

UP SITUATIONS,

GETTINGACQUAINTED,

TESTING

GROUND RULES,

UNCERTAINTY,

CONFUSION

DISAGREEMENTS

OVER

PRIORITIES,

ASSIGNMENTS,

HOSTILITYTENSION,

RESISTANCE,

CHALLENGING

THE

LEADERSHIP,

SUBGROUPS,CLIQUES

CONSENSUS,

ACCEPTANCE OF

LEADERSHIP,

SHARING, TRUST,

TOGETHERNESS,NEW, STABLE

ROLES,

COOPERATION

DELUSION,

DISILLUSION

AND

ACCEPTANCE,

INTIMACY,OPENNESS,

FLEXIBLE, TASK-

RELEVANT

ROLES,

HELPFILNESS,

SUCCESSFULPERFORMANCE

FORMING STORMING NORMING PERFORMING

IMMATURITY MATURITY


18/35

Effects of Group process

Potential group Process Process Actual

effectiveness + gains - loss = group

effectiveness


19/35

GROUP Vs. THE INDIVIDUAL

ADVANTAGES OF GROUPS:

MORE COMPLETE INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE

INCREASEDDIVERSITY OF VIEWS

INCREASED ACCEPTANCE OF A SOLUTION

INCREASED LEGITIMACY

DISADVANTAGES OF A GROUP

TIME CONSUMINGPRESSURES TO CONFORM

DOMINATION BY THE FEW

AMBIGUOUS RESPONSIBILITY


20/35

I AND THE GROUP

1 THE PROBLEM OF IDENTITY WHO

AM I IN THIS GROUP?

2 POWER & INFLUENCE

3 GOALS & NEEDS

4 ACCEPTANCE & INTIMACY5 ISSUES NEW SET OF PROBLEMS,

TENSION, ANXIETY, FRUSTRATION


21/35

TEAM

A TEAM IS A SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE

WITH COMPLEMENTARY SKILLS WHO ARECOMMITTED TO A COMMON PURPOSE,

PERFORMANCE GOALS, AND APPROACH FOR

WHICH THEY HOLD

THEMSELVES MUTUALLYACCOUNTABLE

GROUP

A SET OF INDIVIDUALS WHO SHARE A

COMMON FATE, WHO ARE INTERDEPENDENTIN THE SENSE THAT AN EVENT WHICH

AFFECTS ONE MEMBER IS LIKELY TO AFFECT

ALL


22/35

NOT ALL GROUPS ARE TEAMSWORKING GROUP TEAM

STRONG, CLEARLY FOCUSSED SHARED LEADERSHIP ROLESLEADERSHIP

INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY INDIVIDUAL & MUTUAL

ACCOUNTABILITY

INDIVIDUAL WORK PRODUCTS COLLECTIVEWORK PRODUCTS

RUNS EFFICIENT MEETINGS ENCOURAGES OPEN-ENDED

DISCUSSIONS & ACTIVE PROBLEM

SOLVING MEETINGS

MEASURES ITS EFFECTIVENESS MEASURES PERFORMANCEINDIRECTLY BY ITS INFLUENCEDIRECTLYBY ASSESSING

ON OTHERS COLLECTIVEWORK PRODUCTS

DISCUSSES, DECIDES AND DISCUSSES, DECIDES & DOES

DELEGATES REAL WORK TOGETHER


23/35

SHEEP HERDERS Vs. SHEPHERDS

TECHNIQUES - DIRECTING DEVELOPING

WORK FOCUS - THE FLOCK ITSELF THE FLOCKS SURROUNDINGS

LOCATION - BEHIND THE FLOCK INFRONT OF THE FLOCK

PURPOSE - MOVE SHEEP CREATE SHEPHERD

METHODOLOGY - BARKING & HEEL CLEAR THE PATHNIPPING

RESULT - CREATES DEPENDENCE CREATES SELF-RELIANCE

REGULATING, ENFORCING LEAD & DEVELOP

DIRECTING SUBORDINATES SPEND MORE TIME

AND ENERGYANALYZIING THE

ENVIRONMENT

SURROUNDING THE

SHEEP TO ANTICIPATE

DANGERS AND

OPPORTUNITIES


24/35

BUILDING BLOCKS OF TEAMS

BALANCED ROLESCLEAR OBJECTIVES AND AGREED GOALSOPENNESS AND CONFRONTATIONSUPPORT AND TRUSTCOOPERATION AND CONFLICTSOUND PROCEDURESAPPROPRIATE LEADERSHIPREGULAR REVIEWINDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENTSOUND INTER-GROUP RELATIONS GOOD COMMUNICATIONS


25/35

EIGHT BLOCKAGES OF TEAM BUILDING

UNCLEAR AIM / POOR COMMUNICATION

UNASSERTIVE BEHAVIOUR INEFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT PROCESS NEGATIVE CLIMATE INAPPROPRIATE STRUCTURE UNBALANCED POWER UNDERDEVELOPED INDIVIDUALS INEFFECTIVE TEAM WORK


26/35


27/35

6. CYNICISM AND MISTRUST

(I knew this team work stuff was a load of crap)

7. INTERPERSONAL ATTACKS MADE BEHIND

PEOPLES BACK AND TO OUTSIDERS

(... has never pulled his own weight and neverwill)

8. LOTS OF FINGER POINTING AT TOP MANAGEMENT

AND THE REST OF THE ORGANISATION(If this effort is so important, why do not they give

us more resources?)


28/35


29/35

5 UNDERSTANDING OF ITS "PERSONALITY" : GREATER

AWARENESS OF DYNAMICS & PROCESSES

6 PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES : SEEKING MORE

EFFECTIVE ONES - AT TASK AND INTER-PERSONAL LEVELS

7 CONFLICT : USED MORE AS OPPORTUNITY FOR

CREATIVITY THAN DESTRUCTION

8 COLLABORATION : FOCUSED ON MORE THAN

NARROW COMPETITION

9 OTHER GROUPS : INCREASED ABILITY TO WORK

WITH THEM CREATIVELY

10 INTERDEPENDENCE : CONSTANTLY INCREASING

SENSE OF -

SELFCONSCIOUS

GROUPC

ONSC

IOUS


30/35


31/35

DEVELOPING INTER-TEAM RELATIONS

IDENTIFY THE TEAMS COMMON OBJECTIVES GAIN A PERSONAL UNDERSTANDING OF ONE ANOTHER (TO UNDERSTAND

MOTIVES AND DRIVING FORCES)

DEVELOP SYSTEMS OF INTERACTING MANAGE TEAM BOUNDARIES BUILD A CLIMATE OF TRUST

FACTORS FACILITATING CONSENSUS

CONCERN FOR OTHERS

LISTENING

IDENTIFYING & USING RESOURCES DISCUSSION UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS & LOGIC


32/35

CONSEQUENCESOF NTERGROUPCOMPETITION

WHATHA

PPENSWITHINE

ACH

COMPETINGGROUP?

EACHGROUP ECOMESMORECLOSELY MEMBERSBURYTHEIRINTERNAL IFFERENCES

GROUPCLIMATECHANGESFROMCASUALTOTASKORIENTATION

LEADERSHIPPATTERNSTENDTOCHANGETOAUTOCRATICSTYLE

EACHGROUPBECOMESHIGHLYSTRUCTURED

EACHGROUPDEMANDSMORELOYALTY FROM MEMBERS

WHATHAPPENSBETWEENCOMPETINGGROUPS?

EACH GROUP SEES THE OTHER GROUP AS ENEMY

EACHGROUP EXPERIENCESDISTORTIONOF ERCEPTION TENDS TO PERCEIVEONLYTHEBEST PARTSOFITSELF, DENYING ITS WEAKNESSES, ONLY WORST PARTS OF OTHER GROUPS, DENYING TO SEE OTHE

GROUPSSTRENGTHS,NEG

ATIVESTEROTYPING)

HOSTILITYTOWARDOTHERGROUPSINCREASES,COMMUNICATIONDECREASES

IF GROUPS ARE FORCED INTO INTERACTION, EACH GROUP IS LIKELY TO LISTEN TO THEIR OWNREPRESENTATIVE


33/35

GROUP I

I I O EOF I I G PERSONS

ENGAGE IN EN ONCURRENCE-

SEEKING ECOMES SO DOMINANT IN A

COHESI E GROUP THAT IT TENDS TOOVERRIDE REALISTIC APPRAISAL OF

ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTION. IT

INVOLVES NON-DELI ERATESUPPRESSION OF CRITICAL THOUGHTS AS

A RESULT OF INTERNALI ATION OF THE

GROUPSNORMS.


34/35

SYMPTOMS OF GROUP THINK

INVULNERABILITY

COLLECTIVELY CONSTRUCTED RATIONLIZATION

UNQUESTIONING BELIEF IN THE INHERENT

MORALITY

STEREOTYPED VIEWS

GROUP PRESSURE ON DOUBTING MEMBERS

DEVIATION FROM GROUP CONSENSUS LEADS TO

SELF-CENSORSHIP

ILLUSION OF UNANIMITY

VICTIMS OF GROUP THINK SOMETIMES APPOINT

THEMSELVES AS MINDGUARDS


35/35

CAUSES,SYMPTOMSANDCONSEQUENCES

OF OUPTHINK

CAUSES SYMPTOMS CONSEQUENCES (DEFECTI EDECISION

MAKING)

COHESI EGROUP BELIEFINOWNGROUPS

MORALANDRATIONAL

CORRECTNESS

LIMITEDAND /ORBIASED

SEARCHFORINFORMATION

STRONGLEADERSHIP PERCE I ED

INVULNERABILITY

INCOMPLETELISTOF

ALTERNATIVES

UNSTRUCTUREDGROUP

PROCESS

USVs.THEMTHINKING INADEQUATEEVALUATION

OFALTERNATIVES

PRESSUREFORSOLUTION

PRESSUREBROUGHTTOBEARONTHOSEWHO

DISAGREE

MAINTENANCEOFSTATUSQUO

PERCEIVEDNARROW

RANGEOFSOLUTIONS

SELFCENSORSHIP&

PERCEPTIONOF

UNANIM

ITY

POORPLANNINGFOR

CONTINGENCIES

Documents

Group & Team Work