Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Intergroup Behavior, Negotiation & Team Building

Chapter 9

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior Group Cohesiveness

Definition(s)• Commonness of attitudes or behavior

• Greater force holding together than driving apart

• Sense of belonging and feelings of morale

• Individuals who “are attracted to each other”

Note that several of these definitions tend to be circular or confuse cause with effect.

Cohesiveness and PerformanceCohesiveness is beneficial if the group’s goals are in concert

with organizational goals ….

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Sources of Attraction to a Group/Team

• The goals of the group and the members are compatible and clearly specified

• The group has a charismatic leader• The group has a reputation for accomplishment• The group is small enough to have members’

opinions heard• The members support one another and help each

other overcome obstacles

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GROUP COHESIVENESS & AGREEMENT WITH

ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS

Degree ofgroup

cohesiveness

Low

Performanceprobably oriented

away from organizational goals

Performanceprobably oriented

toward achievementof organizational

goals

HighPerformance

oriented away from organizational goals

Performanceoriented toward achievement of

organizational goals

Low High

Agreement with organizational goals

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Steps Managers Can Take ToEnhance the Two Types of

Group Cohesiveness

• Socio-Emotional Cohesivness– Keep the group relatively small

– Strive for a favorable public image to increase the status and prestige of belonging

– Encourage interaction and cooperation

– Emphasize members’ common characteristics and interests

– Point out environmental threats (e.g., competitor’s achievements to rally the group)

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Steps Managers Can Take ToEnhance the Two Types of

Group Cohesiveness (continued)

• Instrumental Cohesivness– Regularly update and clarify the group’s goal(s)– Give every group member a vital “piece of the

action”– Channel each group member’s special talents

toward the common goal(s)– Recognize and equitably reinforce every member’s

contributions– Frequently remind group members they need each

other to get the job done

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Trust

• How to Build Trust– Communication (keep everyone informed; give

feedback; tell the truth)– Support (be available and approachable)– Respect (delegate; be an active listener)– Fairness (give credit where due; objectively evaluate

performance)– Predictability (be consistent; keep your promises)– Competence (demonstrate good business sense and

professionalism)

Trust: “Reciprocal faith in others’ intentions and behavior.”

Propensity to trust: “A personality trait involving one’s general willingness to trust others.”

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Interpersonal Trust Involves a Cognitive Leap

Firsthand knowledgeof other person’sreliability and

integrity

Distrust Trust

Cognitive leap

Faith in the other person’s good intentions

Assumption that other person will behave as desired

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Basic Distinctions Among Quality Circles, Virtual Teams and

Self-Managed Teams

Quality Circles Virtual TeamsSelf-Managed

TeamsType of team

Type ofempowerment

Members

AdviceAdvice or project(usually project)

Production,project, or action

ConsultationConsultation,participation,or delegation

Delegation

Production/servicepersonnel

Managers andtechnical specialists

Production/service,technicalspecialists

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Basic Distinctions Among Quality Circles, Virtual Teams and Self-Managed Teams (continued)

Quality Circles Virtual TeamsSelf-Managed

TeamsBasis of

membershipRelationship to

organization

Amount of face-to-face

communication

VoluntaryAssigned

(some voluntary)Assigned

Parallel Parallel orintegrated

Integrated

Strictly face-to-face

Periodic to none

Varies, dependingon use of

informationtechnology

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Survey Evidence: What Self-Managing Teams Manage

Percentage of Companies Saying Their Self-Managing Teams Perform These Traditional Management Functions by Themselves.

Schedule work assignments 67%Work with outside customers 67Conduct training 59Set production goals/quotas 56Work with suppliers/vendors 44Purchase equipment/services 43Develop budgets 39Do performance appraisals 36Hire co-workers 33Fire co-workers 14

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Characteristics of an Effective Team

• Clear purpose

• Informality

• Participation

• Listening

• Civilized disagreement

• Consensus decisions

• Open communication

• Clear roles and work assignments

• Shared leadership

• External relations

• Style diversity

• Self-assessment

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Eight Attributes of High-Performance Teams:

• Participative leadership. Creating an interdependency by empowering, freeing up, and serving others

• Shared responsibility. Establishing an environment in which all team members feel as responsible as the manager for the performance of the work unit

• Aligned on purpose. Having a sense of common purpose about why the team exists and the function it serves

• High communication. Creating a climate of trust and open, honest communication

• Future focused. Seeing change as an opportunity for growth• Focused on task. Keeping meetings focused on results• Creative talents. Applying individual talents and creativity• Rapid response. Identifying and acting on opportunities

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Why Work Teams Fail

Mistakes typically made by management Teams cannot overcome weak strategies and poor business

practices Hostile environment for teams (command-and-control

culture; competitive/individual reward plans; management resistance)

Teams adopted as a fad, a quick-fix; no long-term commitment

Lessons from one team not transferred to others (limited experimentation with teams)

Vague or conflicting team assignments Inadequate team skills training Poor staffing of teams Lack of trust

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Why Work Teams Fail

Problems typically experienced by team members Team tries to do too much too soon Conflict over differences in personal work styles (and/or personality

conflicts) Too much emphasis on results, not enough on team processes and

group dynamics Unanticipated obstacle causes team to give up Resistance to doing things differently Poor interpersonal skills (aggressive rather than assertive

communication, destructive conflict, win-lose negotiation) Poor interpersonal chemistry (loners, dominators, self-appointed

experts do not fit in) Lack of trust

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Conflict

Functional conflict serves the organization’s interests while dysfunctional conflict threatens the organization’s interests.

Conflict: “A process in which one party perceives that its interests are being opposed or negatively affected by another party.”

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

The Relationship between Conflict Intensity and Outcomes

Source: LD Brown, Managing Conflict of Organizational Interfaces, © 1986, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., Reading, Massachusetts. Figure 1.1 on page 8.

Low ModerateIntensity

High

Too littleconflict

Appropriateconflict

Too muchconflictNegative

Neutral

Positive

Out

com

es

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Why do we try to eliminate conflict?

• Ingrained – reinforced at home, school, church• Managers are often evaluated and rewarded for

lack of conflict – part of the culture of the organization

• Avoid disturbing the status quo “If it isn’t broke”… do you break it or move on?

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Antecedents of Conflict

• Incompatible personalities or value systems.• Overlapping or unclear job boundaries.• Competition for limited resources.• Interdepartment/intergroup competition.• Differences in perceptions or inaccurate perceptions• Inadequate communication.• Functional differences – line and staff; production &

marketing• Interdependent tasks.• Organizational complexity.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Antecedents of Conflict (continued)

• Unreasonable or unclear policies, standards, or rules.

• Unreasonable deadlines or extreme time pressure.

• Collective decision making.• Decision making by consensus.• Unmet expectations.• Unresolved or suppressed conflict.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Conflict Outcomes

• Agreement: Strive for equitable and fair agreements that last. Search for solutions (Functional consequence)

• Stronger relationships: Build bridges of cohesiveness, goodwill and trust for the future. (Functional consequence)

• Learning: Greater self-awareness and creative problem solving. Change and adapt. (Functional consequence)

• Focus on activity: become task oriented; less concern for individual satisfaction – defeat the enemy. (Dysfunctional consequence)

• Develop loyalty – conformance to norms tends to become important in conflict situations. (Dysfunctional consequence)

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Conflict Outcomes

• Distorted perceptions: members may develop stronger opinions of the importance of their unit. Survival of the fittest. (Dysfunctional consequence)

• Negative stereotyping: as conflict rises, stereotypes are reinforced. See fewer distances in your group and greater differences between groups than really exist. (Dysfunctional consequence)

• Decreased communication: decision-making process can be disrupted. (Dysfunctional consequence)

• Also – violence and aggression. (Dysfunctional consequence)

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

An Updated Contact Model for Minimizing Intergroup Conflict

• Conflict within the group is high• There are negative interactions between groups (or between members of those groups)• Influential third-party gossip about other group is negative

• Work to eliminate specific negative interactions between groups (and members).• Conduct team building to reduce intragroup conflict and prepare employees for cross-functional teamwork.• Encourage personal friendships and good working relationships across groups and departments.• Foster positive attitudes toward members of other groups (empathy, compassion, sympathy).• Avoid or neutralize negative gossip across groups or departments.

Recommended actions:Level of perceived

intergroup conflict tendsto increase when:

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Ways to Build Cross-Cultural Relationships

Behavior RankBe a good listener 1Be sensitive to the needs of others 2Be cooperative, rather than overly competitive 2Advocate inclusive (participative) leadership 3Compromise rather than dominate 4Build rapport through conversations 5Be compassionate and understanding 6Avoid conflict by emphasizing harmony 7Nurture others (develop and mentor) 8

Tie

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Managing Intergroup Conflict through Resolution

• Problem-solving: reduce tensions through face-to-face meetings of conflicting groups. Identify conflicts and resolve them. Involves identifying all issues, debates, and decision-making.

• Superordinate goals: develop a common set of goals and objectives that can’t be obtained without the cooperation of groups involved.

• Resources: Try to expand resource if the source of conflict is limited resources

• Avoidance: effective only in short-term. Does not resolve or eliminate conflict – eventually it must be faced.

• Smoothing: emphasize the common interest of the conflicting groups and de-emphasize their differences. Manager does not take sides – may only be a short-term solution.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Managing Intergroup Conflict through Resolution

• Compromise: No distinct winner or loser – not an ideal situation for either group.

• Authoritative command: management steps in and expresses desires to groups. Subs usually follow; whether or not they agree with it. Again, short-run solution.

• Altering the human variable: changing human behavior• Altering structural variables: change the formal structure

of the group. Changing members, identify a coordinator.

• Identifying a common enemy: groups in conflict may unit to defeat a common enemy.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Five Conflict-Handling Styles

Integrating Obliging

Dominating Avoiding

Compromising

High Low

High

LowCon

cern

for

Oth

ers

Concern for Self

Source: MA Rahim, “A Strategy for Managing Conflict in Complex Organizations, Human Relations, January 1985, p 84. Used with author’s permission.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Techniques

• Facilitation: Third party gets disputants to deal directly and constructively with each other.

• Conciliation: Neutral third party acts as communication link between disputants.

• Peer review: Impartial co-workers hear both sides and render decision that may or may not be binding.

• Ombudsman: Respected and trusted member of the organization hears grievances confidentially.

• Mediation: Trained third-party guides disputants toward their own solution.

• Arbitration: Neutral third-party hears both sides in a court-like setting and renders a binding decision.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Group Negotiations

• “A give-and-take decision-making process involving interdependent parties with different preferences.”

• Only successful negotiations have all parties walking away feeling like they have won. Managers can:– Understand the other side. Identify all needs and positions of

the other group(s). Must ask questions. Attempt free exchange of information.

– Know all options: develop, understand, and evaluate options to resolve the conflict. Outcomes may differ if issue is renegotiated.

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Questionable/Unethical Tactics in Negotiation

LiesPufferyDeceptionWeakening the

opponentStrengthening one’s

own position

NondisclosureInformation

exploitationChange of mindDistractionMaximization

Org

aniz

atio

nal B

ehav

ior

Negotiation Tactics

• Good cop/bad cop

• Nibble: receiving an additional concession after an agreement has been reached.

• Joint problem solving: what can be done so that both sides win?

• Power of competition: outsource the group (or put the fear of that on the table)

• Splitting the difference: useful if groups are at an impasse

• Low-balling: lower other groups expectations