Robbins: Organizational Behavior

Chapter Eight

FOUNDATIONS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR

1. A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives. 2. Groups can be either formal or informal.

Formal groupsthose defined by the organization s structure, with designated wor! assignments establishing tas!s a. "he behaviors that one should engage in are stipulated by and directed toward organizational goals. b. An airline flight crew is an e#ample of a formal group.

Informal groupsalliances that are neither formally structured nor organizationally determined a. $atural formations in the wor! environment in response to the need for social contact b. "hree employees from different departments who regularly eat lunch together is an informal group.

%. &t is possible to sub'classify groups as command, tas!, interest, or friendship groups.

Command groups are dictated by the formal organization. a. "he organization chart determines a command group. b. (omposed of direct reports to a given manager Task groupsorganizationally determinedrepresent those wor!ing together to complete a job tas!. a. A tas! group s boundaries are not limited to its immediate hierarchical superior. &t can cross command relationships. b. )or instance, if a college student is accused of a campus crime, it may re*uire communication and coordination among the dean of academic affairs, the dean of students, the registrar, the director of security, and the student s advisor. c. All command groups are also tas! groups, but the reverse need not be true.

An interest group. +eople who affiliate to attain a specific objective with which each is concerned. a. ,mployees who band together to have their vacation schedules altered b. )riendship groups often develop because the individual members have one or more common characteristics. c. -ocial alliances, which fre*uently e#tend outside the wor! situation, can be based on similar age or ethnic heritage.

Informal groups satisfy their members social needs. a. "hese types of interactions among individuals, even though informal, deeply affect their behavior and performance. b. "here is no single reason why individuals join groups. c. ,#hibit .'1 summarizes the most popular reasons people have for joining groups.

-tages of Group /evelopment A The Five!"tage #odel $E%hibit &!'( 1

Robbins: Organizational Behavior 1. Forming:

Chapter Eight

(haracterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group s purpose, structure, and leadership. 0embers are trying to determine what types of behavior are acceptable. -tage is complete when members have begun to thin! of themselves as part of a group.

2. "torming:

1ne of intragroup conflict. 0embers accept the e#istence of the group, but there is resistance to constraints on individuality. (onflict over who will control the group. 2hen complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership within the group.

%. )orming3

1ne in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates cohesiveness. "here is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie. -tage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group has assimilated a common set of e#pectations of what defines correct member behavior.

4. *erforming:

"he structure at this point is fully functional and accepted. Group energy has moved from getting to !now and understand each other to performing. )or permanent wor! groups, performing is the last stage in their development.

5. Ad+ourning:

)or temporary committees, teams, tas! forces, and similar groups that have a limited tas! to perform, there is an adjourning stage. &n this stage, the group prepares for its disbandment. Attention is directed toward wrapping up activities.

6esponses of group members vary in this stage. -ome are upbeat, bas!ing in the group s accomplishments. 1thers may be depressed over the loss of camaraderie and friendships.

7. 0any assume that a group becomes more effective as it progresses through the first four stages. 2hile generally true, what ma!es a group effective is more comple#. 8nder some conditions, high levels of conflict are conducive to high group performance. 9. Groups do not always proceed clearly from one stage to the ne#t. -ometimes several stages go on simultaneously, as when groups are storming and performing. Groups even occasionally regress to previous stages. .. Another problem is that it ignores organizational conte#t. )or instance, a study of a coc!pit crew in an airliner found that, within ten minutes, three strangers 2

Robbins: Organizational Behavior assigned to fly together for the first time had become a high'performing group. :. "he strong organizational conte#t provides the rules, tas! definitions, information, and resources needed for the group to perform.

Chapter Eight

B An Alternative #odel: For Temporar, -roups .ith /eadlines 1. "emporary groups with deadlines do not seem to follow the previous model. "heir pattern is called the pun0tuated!e1uilibrium model. -tudies indicate their own uni*ue se*uencing. $E%hibit &!2( 2. +hase &"he first meeting sets the group s direction; the first inertia phase. A framewor! of behavioral patterns and assumptions emerges. "hese lasting patterns can appear as early as the first few seconds of the group s life can. %. "hen a transition ta!es place when the group has used up half its allotted time.

"he group s direction becomes fi#ed and is unli!ely to be ree#amined throughout the first half of the group s life. "he group tends to stand still or become loc!ed into a fi#ed course of action. "he group is incapable of acting on new insights in +hase 1.

4. "he midpoint appears to wor! li!e an alarm cloc!, heightening members awareness that their time is limited and that they need to <get moving.= A transition initiates major changes. 5. "his ends +hase 1 and is characterized by a concentrated burst of changes, dropping of old patterns, and adoption of new perspectives. "he transition sets a revised direction for +hase 2.

7. +hase 2 is a new e*uilibrium or period of inertia. &n this phase, the group e#ecutes plans created during the transition period. 9. "he group s last meeting is characterized by mar!edly accelerated activity. .. "he punctuated'e*uilibrium model characterizes groups as e#hibiting long periods of inertia interspersed with brief revolutionary changes triggered primarily by their members awareness of time and deadlines. Group -tructure 1. Formal 3eadership

Almost every wor! group has a formal leader. "ypically identified by title "his leader can play an important part in the group s success(hapter 11 > 12 reviews the research.

2. Roles

All group members are actors, each playing a role. <A set of e#pected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit.= 2e are re*uired to play a number of diverse roles, both on and off our jobs. 0any of these roles are compatible; some create conflicts. /ifferent groups impose different role re*uirements on individuals. 3

Robbins: Organizational Behavior %. Role identit,

Chapter Eight

"here are certain attitudes and actual behaviors consistent with a role, and they create the role identity. +eople have the ability to shift roles rapidly when they recognize that the situation and its demands clearly re*uire major changes.

4. Role per0eption

1ne s view of how one is supposed to act in a given situation is a role perception. 2e get these perceptions from stimuli all around usfriends, boo!s, movies, television. "he primary reason that apprenticeship programs e#ist is to allow beginners to watch an <e#pert,= so that they can learn to act as they are supposed to.

5. Role e%pe0tations

?ow others believe you should act in a given situation ?ow you behave is determined to a large e#tent by the role defined in the conte#t in which you are acting. 2hen role e#pectations are concentrated into generalized categories, we have role stereotypes. "he psychological contract is an unwritten agreement that e#ists between employees and their employer. a. &t sets out mutual e#pectationswhat management e#pects from wor!ers, and vice versa. b. &t defines the behavioral e#pectations that go with every role. c. &f role e#pectations as implied are not met, e#pect negative repercussions from the offended party.

7. Role 0onfli0t:

<2hen an individual is confronted by divergent role e#pectations= &t e#ists when compliance with one role re*uirement may ma!e more difficult the compliance with another. All of us have faced and will continue to face role conflicts. "he critical issue is how conflicts imposed by divergent e#pectations impact on behavior. "hey increase internal tension and frustration.

A An e%periment: 4imbardo5s "imulated *rison 1. (onducted by -tanford 8niversity psychologist +hilip @imbardo and associates. "hey created a <prison= in the basement of the -tanford psychology building. 2. "hey hired two'dozen emotionally stable, physically healthy, law'abiding students who scored <normal average= on e#tensive personality tests. ,ach student was randomly assigned the role of <guard= or <prisoner.= %. "o get the e#periment off to a <realistic= start, @imbardo got the cooperation of the local police department3

+olice went, unannounced, to the future prisoners homes, arrested and handcuffed them, put them in a s*uad car in front of friends and neighbors, and too! them to police head*uarters where they were boo!ed and fingerprinted. )rom there, they were ta!en to the -tanford prison. 4

Robbins: Organizational Behavior 4. At the start of the planned two'wee! e#periment, there were no measurable differences between those assigned to be guards and those chosen to be prisoners.

Chapter Eight

"he guards received no special training in how to be prison guards. "hey were told only to <maintain law and order= in the prison and not to ta!e any nonsense. +hysical violence was forbidden.

5. "o simulate further the realities of prison life, the prisoners were allowed visits. 7. 0oc! guards wor!ed eight'hour shifts; the moc! prisoners were !ept in their cells around the cloc! and were allowed out only for meals, e#ercise, toilet privileges, head'count lineups, and wor! details.

9. &t too! the <prisoners= little time to accept the authority positions of the guards, or the moc! guards to adjust to their new authority roles.

After the guards crushed a rebellion, the prisoners became increasingly passive. "he prisoners actually began to believe and act as if they were inferior and powerless.

.. ,very guard, at some time during the simulation, engaged in abusive, authoritative behavior. $ot one prisoner said, <-top this. & am a student li!e you. "his is just an e#perimentA= :. "he simulation actually proved too successful in demonstrating how *uic!ly individuals learn new roles. "he researchers had to stop the e#periment after only si# days because of the pathological reactions that the participants were demonstrating. 1B. 2hat should you conclude from this prison simulationC

"he participants had learned stereotyped conceptions of guard and prisoner roles from the mass media and their own personal e#periences in power and powerless relationships at home. "his allowed them easily and rapidly to assume roles that were very different from their inherent personalities.

B )orms 1. All groups have norms<acceptable standards of behavior that are shared by the group s members.= $orms tell members what they ought and ought not to do under certain circumstances. 2. ?awthorne -tudies. ,#periments conducted between 1:24 and 1:%2 by ,lton 0ayo at 2estern ,lectric at the company s ?awthorne 2or!s in (hicago. -tudies conclude that a wor!er s behavior and sentiments were closely related Group influences were significant in affecting individual behavior Group standards were highly effective in establishing individual wor!er output 0oney was less a factor in determining wor!er output %. A wor! group s norms are uni*ue, yet there are still some common classes of 5

Robbins: Organizational Behavior norms.

Chapter Eight

*erforman0e norms are probably the most common class of norms. a. ,#plicit cues on how hard they should wor!, how to get the job done, their level of output, appropriate levels of tardiness, and the li!e b. "hese norms are e#tremely powerful in affecting an individual employee s performance.

Appearan0e norms include things li!e appropriate dress, loyalty to the wor! group or organization, when to loo! busy, and when it is acceptable to goof off. "o0ial arrangement norms come from informal wor! groups and primarily regulate social interactions within the group. Allo0ation of resour0es norms can originate in the group or in the organization.

4. (onformity

"here is considerable evidence that groups can place strong pressures on individual members to change their attitudes and behaviors to conform to the group s standard. &ndividuals conform to the important groups to which they belong or hope to belong. ?owever, all groups do not impose e*ual conformity pressures on their members. &mportant groups are referred to as referen0e groups. "he reference group is characterized as one where the person is aware of the others; the person defines himself or herself as a member, or would li!e to be a member; and the person feels that the group members are significant to himDher. "he pressure that group e#erts for conformity was demonstrated by -olomon Asch. $"ee E%hibit &!6( Groups of seven or eight people were as!ed to compare two cards held by the e#perimenter. 1ne card had one line, the other had three lines of varying length. 8nder ordinary conditions, subjects made fewer than one percent errors.

2ill the pressures to conform result in an unsuspecting subject E8--F altering hisDher answer to align with the othersC "he e#periment began with several sets of matching e#ercises. All the subjects gave the right answers. 1n the third set, however, the first subject gave an obviously wrong answer, the ne#t subject gave the same wrong answer, and so did the others until it got to the un!nowing subject. "he results obtained by Asch demonstrated that over many e#periments and many trials, subjects conformed in about %9G of the trials; the subjects gave answers that they !new were wrong but that were consistent with the replies of other group members.

5. ?as time altered the validity of these findings of nearly 5B years ago, and are they generalizable across culturesC

"here have been changes in the level of conformity over time. Hevels of conformity have steadily declined. Asch s findings are culture'bound. (onformity to social norms is higher in collectivist cultures than in individualistic cultures. 6

Robbins: Organizational Behavior 7. /eviant 2or!place Iehavior3 E,#hibit .'5F. "his term covers a full range of antisocial actions by organizational members that intentionally violate established norms and that result in negative conse*uences for the organization, its members, or both.

Chapter Eight

6udeness is on the rise and 12 percent of those who e#perienced it actually *uit their jobs. 2hen deviant wor!place behavior occurs it can affect employee commitment, cooperation, and motivation. "his could lead to performance issues and a lac! of job satisfaction.

C "tatus 1. -tatus is a socially defined position or ran! given to groups or group members by others. 2e live in a class'structured society despite all attempts to ma!e it more egalitarian. 2. 7hat /etermines "tatus8 -tatus characteristics theory J differences in status characteristics create status hierarchies within groups. -tatus derived from one of three sources3 the power a person wields over others; a person s ability to contribute to group s goals; individual s personal characteristics.

"tatus and norms3

?igh'status members of groups often are given more freedom to deviate from norms than other group members. ?igh'status people also are better able to resist conformity pressures. "he previous findings e#plain why many star athletes, famous actors, top' performing salespeople, and outstanding academics seem oblivious to appearance or social norms.

6 "tatus and -roup Intera0tion 9 &nteraction is influenced by status ?ighB'status people tend to be assertive -tatus difference inhibit diversity of ideas > creativity Hower'status members tend to be less active

"tatus Ine1uit,3 2hen ine*uity is perceived, it creates dise*uilibrium that results in corrective behavior. "he trappings of formal positions are also important elements in maintaining e*uity. ,mployees e#pect what an individual has and receives to be congruent with hisDher status. )or e#ample3 pay, office space, etc. Groups generally agree within themselves on status criteria. &ndividuals can find themselves in a conflict situation when they move between groups whose status criteria are different or when they join groups whose members have heterogeneous bac!grounds

7. -tatus and 0ulture: a. (ultural differences affect status. )or e#ample, the )rench are 7

Robbins: Organizational Behavior highly status conscious. b. (ountries differ on the criteria that create status3 a. -tatus for Hatin Americans and Asians tends to be derived from family position and formal roles held in organizations. b. &n the 8nited -tates and Australia, it tends to be bestowed more on accomplishments. 0a!e sure you understand who and what holds status when interacting with people from a different culture than your own / "ize 1. "he size of a group affects the group s overall behavior, but the effect depends on the dependent variables3

Chapter Eight

-maller groups are faster at completing tas!s than are larger ones. &f the group is engaged in problem solving, large groups consistently do better. Harge groupsa dozen or more membersare good for gaining diverse input. -maller groupsseven membersare better at doing something productive with that input.

2. "o0ial loafing is the tendency for individuals to e#pend less effort when wor!ing collectively than when wor!ing individually.

A common stereotype about groups is that team spirit spurs individual effort and enhances overall productivity. &n the late 1:2Bs, a German psychologist named 0a# 6ingelmann compared the results of individual and group performance on a rope' pulling tas!. 6ingelmann s results showed that groups of three people e#erted a force only two'and'a'half times the average individual performance. Groups of eight collectively achieved less than four times the solo rate. &ncreases in group size are inversely related to individual performance. 6eplications of 6ingelmann s research generally support his findings.

%. (auses of social loafing3

A belief that others in the group are not carrying their fair share. "he dispersion of responsibility and the relationship between an individual s input and the group s output is clouded. "here will be a reduction in efficiency where individuals thin! that their contribution cannot be measured.

4. &mplications for 1I3

2here managers utilize collective wor! situations to enhance morale and teamwor!, they must also provide means by which individual efforts can be identified. &t is not consistent with collective societies where individuals are motivated by in'group goals. "he (hinese and &sraelis actually performed better in a group than when wor!ing alone. 8

Robbins: Organizational Behavior 5. 1ther conclusions about groups3

Chapter Eight

Groups with an odd number of members tend to be preferable. Groups made up of five or seven members do a pretty good job of e#ercising the best elements of both small and large groups.

E Cohesiveness 1. Groups differ in their 0ohesiveness, <the degree to which members are attracted to each other and are motivated to stay in the group.= 2. (ohesiveness is important because it has been found to be related to the group s productivity. $"ee E%hibit &!:( %. "he relationship of cohesiveness and productivity depends on the performance'related norms established by the group3

&f performance'related norms are high, a cohesive group will be more productive. &f cohesiveness is high and performance norms are low, productivity will be low.

4. ?ow to encourage group cohesiveness3 0a!e the group smaller. ,ncourage agreement with group goals. &ncrease the time members spend together. &ncrease the status of the group and the perceived difficulty of attaining membership in the group. -timulate competition with other groups. Give rewards to the group rather than to individual members. +hysically isolate the group. Group /ecision 0a!ing A -roup vs the Individual 1. "trengths of group de0ision!making:

Groups generate more complete information and !nowledge. "hey offer increased diversity of views. "his opens up the opportunity for more approaches and alternatives to be considered. "he evidence indicates that a group will almost always outperform even the best individual. Groups lead to increased acceptance of a solution.

2. 7eaknesses of group de0ision!making: "hey are time consuming. "here is a conformity pressure in groups. Group discussion can be dominated by one or a few members. Group decisions suffer from ambiguous responsibility.

%. Effe0tiveness and effi0ien0,: 2hether groups are more effective than individuals depends on the criteria you use. &n terms of accuracy, group decisions will tend to be more accurate. 1n the average, groups ma!e better'*uality decisions than individuals. 9

Robbins: Organizational Behavior &f decision effectiveness is defined in terms of speed, individuals are superior. &f creativity is important, groups tend to be more effective than individuals. &f effectiveness means the degree of acceptance the final solution achieves, groups are better. 4. &n terms of efficiency, groups almost always stac! up as a poor second to the individual decision ma!er. "he e#ceptions tend to be those instances where, to achieve comparable *uantities of diverse input, the single decision ma!er must spend a great deal of time reviewing files and tal!ing to people. 5. "ummar,: Groups offer an e#cellent vehicle for performing many of the steps in the decision'ma!ing process. "hey are a source of both breadth and depth of input for information gathering. 2hen the final solution is agreed upon, there are more people in a group decision to support and implement it. Group decisions consume time, create internal conflicts, and generate pressures toward conformity. B -roupthink and -roupshift 1. Groupthin! and groupshift are two by'products of group decision'ma!ing. Iriefly, the differences between the two are3 2. -roupthink is related to norms3

Chapter Eight

&t describes situations in which group pressures for conformity deter the group from critically appraising unusual, minority, or unpopular views. Groupthin! is a disease that attac!s many groups and can dramatically hinder performance.

-roupshift &t indicates that, in discussing a given set of alternatives and arriving at a solution, group members tend to e#aggerate the initial positions that they held. &n some situations, caution dominates, and there is a conservative shift. "he evidence indicates that groups tend toward a ris!y shift. Het us loo! at each of these phenomena in more detail.

C -roupthink 1. "he phenomenon that occurs when group members become so enamored of see!ing concurrence is that the norm for consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action and the full e#pression of deviant, minority, or unpopular views. 2. &t is a deterioration in an individual s mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment as a result of group pressures. %. -ymptoms of Groupthin! include3

Group members rationalize any resistance to the assumptions they have made. 0embers apply direct pressures on those who momentarily e#press doubts. "hose members who hold differing points of view see! to avoid deviating 10

Robbins: Organizational Behavior from group consensus by !eeping silent. "here appears to be an illusion of unanimity. 4. &n studies of historic American foreign policy decisions, these symptoms were found to prevail when government policy'ma!ing groups failed. ,#amples3 a. b. c. d. e. f. 8nprepared ness at +earl ?arbor in 1:41 "he 8.-. invasion of $orth Korea "he Iay of +igs fiasco "he escalation of the Lietnam 2ar "he (hallenger and (olumbia space shuttle disasters "he failure of the main mirror on the ?ubble telescope

Chapter Eight

5. Groupthin! appears to be closely aligned with the conclusions Asch drew from his e#periments on the lone dissenter. "he results where those individuals who hold a position different from the majority are put under pressure to suppress or change their true beliefs. 7. Groupthin! does not attac! all groups. &t occurs most often where there is a clear group identity, where members hold a positive image of their group which they want to protect, and where the group perceives a collective threat to this positive image. 9. ?ow to minimize groupthin!3

,ncourage group leaders to play an impartial role. Appoint one group member to play the role of devil s advocate. 8tilize e#ercises that stimulate active discussion of diverse alternatives without threatening the group and intensifying identity protection.

/ -roupshift 1. &n some cases, the group decisions are more conservative than the individual decisions. 0ore often, however, the shift is toward greater ris!. 2. 2hat appears to happen in groups is that the discussion leads to a significant shift in the positions of members toward a more e#treme position in the direction in which they were already leaning before the discussion. (onservatives become more cautious, and the more aggressive ta!e on more ris!. %. "he groupshift can be viewed as actually a special case of groupthin!. "he decision of the group reflects the dominant decision'ma!ing norm that develops during the group s discussion. 4. "he greater occurrence of the shift toward ris! has generated several e#planations3

/iscussion creates familiarization among the members. As they become more comfortable with each other, they also become more bold and daring. 0ost first'world societies value ris!. 2e admire individuals who are willing to ta!e ris!s. Group discussion motivates members to show that they are at least as willing as their peers to ta!e ris!s. "he most plausible e#planation of the shift toward ris!, however, seems to be that the group diffuses responsibility. Group decisions free any single member from accountability for the group s final choice. 11

Robbins: Organizational Behavior 5. &mplications of Groupshift3

Chapter Eight

6ecognize that group decisions e#aggerate the initial position of the individual members. "he shift has been shown more often to be toward greater ris!.

E -roup /e0ision!#aking Te0hni1ues 1. 0ost Group /ecision 0a!ing "a!es +lace in &nteracting Groups

&n these groups, members meet face to face and rely on both verbal and nonverbal interaction to communicate with each other. &nteracting groups often censor themselves and pressure individual members toward conformity of opinion. Irainstorming, the nominal group techni*ue, and electronic meetings have been proposed as ways to reduce many of the problems inherent in the traditional interacting group.

2. Brainstorming:

&t is meant to overcome pressures for conformity in the interacting group that retard the development of creative alternatives. &n a typical brainstorming session, a half dozen to a dozen people sit around a table. "he process3 a. "he group leader states the problem clearly. b. 0embers then <free'wheel= as many alternatives as they can in a given length of time. c. $o criticism is allowed, and all the alternatives are recorded for later discussion and analysis. d. 1ne idea stimulates others, and group members are encouraged to <thin! the unusual.=

%. The nominal group te0hni1ue:

6estricts discussion or interpersonal communication during the decision' ma!ing process Group members are all physically present, but members operate independently. -pecifically, a problem is presented, and then the following steps ta!e place3

a. 0embers meet as a group but, before any discussion ta!es place, each member independently writes down his or her ideas on the problem. b. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to the group. ,ach member ta!es his or her turn. c. "he group now discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them. d. ,ach group member silently and independently ran!'orders the ideas. e. "he idea with the highest aggregate ran!ing determines the final decision. E -roup /e0ision!#aking Te0hni1ues $0ont (

"he chief advantage of the nominal group techni*ue is that it permits the group to meet formally but does not restrict independent thin!ing, as does 12

Robbins: Organizational Behavior the interacting group. 4. "he computer'assisted group or electronic meeting blends the nominal group techni*ue with sophisticated computer technology.

Chapter Eight

8p to 5B people sit around a horseshoe'shaped table, empty e#cept for a series of computer terminals. &ssues are presented to participants, and they type their responses onto their computer screen. &ndividual comments, as well as aggregate votes, are displayed on a projection screen. "he major advantages of electronic meetings are anonymity, honesty, and speed.

13