0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views46 pages

Session 12 & 13

IGD Course Study material -7 IIM Udaipur

Uploaded by

rishabh.tiw1102
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
16 views46 pages

Session 12 & 13

IGD Course Study material -7 IIM Udaipur

Uploaded by

rishabh.tiw1102
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 46

IGD

Kumar Kunal Kamal

IIM Udaipur
Groups Vs. Teams

Team Group
Size Limited Medium or Large
Selection Crucial Immaterial
Leadership Shared or Rotating Solo
Perception Mutual Understanding Focus on Leader
Style Coordination Convergence/Conformism
Spirit Dynamic Interaction Togetherness/
Persecution of opponents
Team
• A group of people linked in a common purpose.

• Focus: Completion of tasks that are


interdependent and complex
• Requirement: Coordinated and motivated
effort; complementary skills

• Example: Public Relations team,


Sales Promotion team,
Advertising team,
Publicity team
Team Benefits
(Organizational)
• More resources for problem solving
• Improved creativity and innovation
• Improved quality of decision making
• Greater commitments to tasks
• Increased motivation of members
• Better control and work discipline

• Synergy: Working together to


creation of a whole greater than or equal to
the sum of its parts.
Team Benefits (Individual)

Three Acquired Needs (Individual Level): Achievement, Power, Affiliation

Achievement: Collaborating with others


for a common purpose

Power: Feeling of power and


satisfaction that comes
from being directly
responsible for your work
decisions

Affiliation: In-group feeling

Three Acquired Needs (Interpersonal Level): Inclusion, Control, Affection


Team Challenges

• Social Loafing Tendency of some people to avoid responsibility by


free-riding in groups.

• Social Facilitation: Tendency for one’s behavior to be influenced by the


presence of others in a group or social setting. This
effect could be positive/negative depending upon
available skills and/or task familiarity.

• Ringelmann Effect: When working in groups, individuals slacken


Ringelmann Effect

Maximilien Ringelmann (1861-1931)


French Agricultural Engineer
Focus was to find the relative efficiency of work furnished by
horses, oxen, men, and machines in various agricultural
applications.
Comparison of individual and group performance was only a
secondary interest.

Number of People 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Effort per Individual 100% 93% 85% 77% 70% 63% 56% 49%

Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 936-941.
Group
(Team)
Productivity
Productive and Effective team
• Ideally a productive and Effective team would have a mixture of people taking the
following team roles:

• Thinkers: Planning oriented members; creative problem-solvers


• Doers: Action-oriented members
• Social: Interaction-oriented members

• Team Roles: Clusters of behavioral preference


Meredith Belbin
• 1926 ~
• An effective team has members that cover nine key
roles in managing the team
• Each of these roles needs to be fulfilled in order for a
team to be effective
• Developed the Belbin Team Role Inventory which
assesses how an individual behaves in a team
environment
• The inventory scores people on how strongly they
express traits from 9 different Team Roles
Concern for People

Concern for Production


Points on the Grid are not to be thought of as
personality types that isolate a given individual’s
behavior.

• Aspects of Pressures acting on an individual to


Managerial manage in a certain fashion:

Styles • Self (from inside himself)

• Situation (from the immediate external situation)

• System (from characteristics of the organizational


system including traditions, established practices, and
procedures)
Back to the Five Paragraphs
Concern for People

First paragraph: 1,1 paragraph


Second paragraph: 1,9 paragraph
Third paragraph: 5,5 paragraph
Fourth paragraph: 9,1 paragraph
Fifth paragraph: 9,9 paragraph
Concern for Production
Interpersonal
Conflict
Management
Styles
Avoiding
• You do not want to participate.
Competing
• You want to work for yourself against the other
person.
INTERPERSONAL Compromising
CONFLICT • You want to split the payoff evenly between yourself
MANAGEMENT and the other person.
STRATEGIES Accommodating
• You want to let the other person make the decision
that determines your payoff.
Collaborating
• You wish to work with the other person in determining
the payoffs.

Ruble, T. L., & Cosier, R. A. (1982). A laboratory study of five conflict-handling modes.
Conflict management and industrial relations, 158-171.
People routinely use only one or two conflict styles. A preferred
style may be linked to your cultural upbringing, your family of
origin, or other life experiences. Self-awareness regarding your
preferences and habits will help you improve your conflict
responses and may open up your understanding of your
colleague’s conflict style preferences.
Avoiding
Those who avoid conflict may withdraw and
delay dealing with the problem, but this may
make the situation worse in the long run. The
avoiding style may not be appropriate if it is
your formal responsibility to resolve the issue; if
the issue itself needs prompt attention; or if the
issue has great importance to you. While the
avoiding style is often painted in a negative
light, one may intentionally choose this style if
the problem is insignificant or temporary; if the
“potential dysfunctional effect of confronting the
other party outweighs benefits of resolution”; or
if a “cooling off period is needed”.
Accomodating

The value of preserving relationships and keeping


harmony is important to those who heavily use the
accommodating style but this comes with a cost of not
fully exploring or valuing the accommodating person’s
preferred outcomes. This neglect of one party’s concerns
will likely have consequences in the long term especially
if the issue is of great importance to them.
Accommodating can be an appropriate approach to
conflict “when the issue is relatively insignificant or
temporary”. This style is often used “when an individual
is in a low-power position, with little hope of achieving
the preferred outcome”.
This style is often used
when a temporary
solution is needed for an
urgent issue, or when
“opposing parties of
equal strength are
stubbornly committed to
different goals and
Compromising solutions”. Compromising
can yield workable
solutions, however it can
also encourage “game-
playing rather than open
and sincere expression of
needs, goals, and
limitations”.
Competing
A competitive style may be
appropriate when time is short and a
quick decision needs to be made or
“when an unpopular, but necessary,
decision must be made by a person in
leadership”.
Collaborating
The collaborating/integrating style is
effective when issues are complex and
when more than one party is needed
to solve the problem. Collaborative
colleagues create substantive
solutions through the synthesis of
their ideas, skills, and resources. The
collaborative style should be used
when mutual commitment to a
decision is needed but this style
requires adequate time for input and
discussion.
Group
Formation
Group Formation

• Propinquity: People who are spatially proximal, group together


• Homophily: Tendency of individuals to group with similar others as similarity
breeds connection

• Social Categorization Theory: People group together based on their


“awareness of a common category
membership”.

• Social Exchange Theory: People group together based on subjective


cost-benefit analysis and the comparison of
alternatives.
Bruce Tuckman
• 1938 – 2016

• A part of a think-tank studying small group


behavior as the US Navy prepared for a future
of small crew vessels and stations.

• Naval Medical Research Institute – Studying


small groups from all perspectives and under
all conditions.

• Worked under Irwin Altman who collected


every article on group development, most of
which were psychoanalytic studies of therapy
or T-groups.
T-Groups

• Training Groups
• Group training with a focus
on interpersonal sensitivity
• Started by Jacob L. Moreno
(1889 – 1974), a psycho-
sociologist and the founder of
psychodrama, and
sociometry.
• Pioneered by Kurt Lewin, one
of the first to study group
dynamics
B = ƒ(P,E)
Lewin’s Equation
The Importance of Groups

• … where an individual has a personality pattern which requires certain kinds of individuals through which his
emotions can find some sort of adequate outlet, and when placed in a social group where these possibilities are
reduced to a minimum the type of personality he presents, finding no possibilities of expression and growth, is
stunted in its development, retarded in its growth, rendered frequently regressive in the directions in which it
seeks satisfactions … it is theoretically possible to place such an individual in a human environment where he
would, as it were, blossom and grow and be not only a socially acceptable and useful, but a relatively happy
person.

• Dr. Moreno emphasizes the fact that he differs from the psychoanalytic approach in an other very significant way,
namely, that the analyst works backward to an explanation for the individual's conduct while he takes the
individual's conduct as the starting point and works forward.
“All May Survive”
• Another tragic insufficiency of man is his failure to produce a well integrated society. The difference
between the social structure in which he functions and the psychological structure which is an
expression of his organic choice and the tension arising between the two constantly threaten to
disrupt the social machinery so painfully built up by him.

• If this whole of mankind is a unity, then tendencies must emerge between the different parts of this
unity, drawing them at one time apart and drawing them at another time together.

• A new appreciation may then arise of the sense of the old myth which all great religions have
brought forth in remarkable unison, the myth of the father who has created the universe for all, who
has made its spaces so immense that all may be born and so that all may live.
Bruce Tuckman
• 1938 – 2016

• A part of a think-tank studying small group


behavior as the US Navy prepared for a future
of small crew vessels and stations.

• Naval Medical Research Institute – Studying


small groups from all perspectives and under
all conditions.

• Worked under Irwin Altman who collected


every article on group development, most of
which were psychoanalytic studies of therapy
or T-groups.
Irwin Altman

1930 ~

Studied close relationships among friends, intimates


and family members.

A cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural approach to


understanding the social interaction and relationship
between people.
Social Penetration Theory: As relationships
develop, communication moves from relatively
shallow, non-intimate levels to deeper, more personal
levels, wherein more personal and sensitive
information would be shared.

Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bruce Tuckman

Found two realms of group functioning:


Interpersonal or group structure
Task activity realm

Interpersonal Realm Task Activity Realm


1) Testing-dependence 1) Orientation
2) Conflict 2) Emotionality
3) Cohesion 3) Relevant opinion exchange
4) Functional roles 4) Emergence of solutions

Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399.
Forming and Storming
• Forming: Interpersonal orientation accomplished primarily through testing.
Testing serves to identify the boundaries of both interpersonal and
task behaviours.
Establishment of dependency relationships with team members.
(Interpersonal orientation + Emotional testing + Dependence)

• Storming: Conflict and polarization about interpersonal issues.


Emotional outpouring in communication behavior.
Resistance to group influence
(Interpersonal conflict + Emotional outpour + Resistance)
Norming and Performing
• Norming: Overcoming of resistance through development of in-group feelings
Role-adoption and evolvement of standards
Acceptance of differences in personal opinion
(In-group feelings + Role-standardization + Acceptance)

• Performing: Adaptable interpersonal structures focused on performance


Flexibility in terms of roles
Group cohesion is build that helps channel group energy
(Interpersonal adaptability + Role-flexibility + Cohesion)
Bruce Tuckman’s Model of Group Development
Adjourning

1977: Bruce Tuckman (along with Mary Ann Jensen)


proposed an update to the ‘Tuckman Hypothesis’

They introduced a fifth stage, called Adjourning stage


(a trial to rhyme with ‘ming’)

Adjourning: The stage of dissolution


Deforming/Mourning
Can be painful if unplanned

Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Management, 2(4), 419-427.
Group Decision
Making
• Certain Environments
• Risk Environments
Decision Making • Uncertain Environments
Techniques
for Group
Decision
Making
Brainstorming: A technique for generating as many ideas as possible on a given subject
while suspending evaluation until all the ideas have been suggested.
Individual vs. Group
Nominal Group Technique (NGT) A structured approach to group decision making that
focuses on generating alternatives and choosing one.
No Criticism Please
Devil’s Advocacy A technique for preventing groupthink in which a group or individual is
given the role of critic during decision making.
Only Criticism Please
Dialectical Inquiry A debate between two opposing sets of recommendations
Don’t make it a 0-sum game.
Selecting
Appropriate
Techniques
• Brainstorming
• More ideas
• Delphi
• Expertise
• Devil’s advocacy | Dialectical
enquiry (to tackle Group Think)

Make Teams/Groups
Accountable for their actions

You might also like