GROUP

DYNAMICS &
TEAM WORK
INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
 GROUP VS. TEAM
There is some confusion about the difference between a group and
a team; traditionally academics, communication and management
theorists use the terms: group, group-working, group-interaction,
group-structure etc. to refer to the dynamics of people working
together towards a common cause.
• The word group however has a broader meaning – a group of
passengers on a flight have a common characteristic – to
travel, but they are not necessarily working towards a common
cause.

• A team is generally more specific. The distinction is that a

team is working together for a common cause. A group of
schoolchildren may be in the same class, whereas a team of
schoolchildren may be working together on a specific project
within the class.

• When we talk about groups and teams we use the terms

interchangeably – it is possible to have a group without a team
but not a team without a group.
TYPES OF
GROUPS
1. Formal group:

This group is defined by the organizational structure. After

planning, organizations group the activities and put those
under a formal structure, deciding their goals and objectives
and strategies to achieve the same. Formal group members
report to their superiors and interact with each other to achieve
the common goals. Usually a formal group comprises those
whose nature of job is more or less homogeneous. For
example, in a call- centre, all out-bound callers handling the
same customer account represent a formal group. Thus, formal
group is formed based on job specialization and similarity of
skill-sets to reap the advantages of division of labour.
2. Informal groups:

informal group is neither formally structured nor organizationally

determined. Informal groups are natural formations in the work
environment that appear in response to the need for social contact.
Three employees from different departments who regularly have lunch or
cof-
fee together are an informal group. These types of interactions among indi-
viduals, though informal, deeply affect their behavior and performance.
TYPES OF TEAM
• The Functional team is something which is related to a function. For example, you
have the design function, purchasing function, etc. People from these group when
they work together form a functional team.

• On the other hand, Cross Functional Team is a team where people from different
functions work towards a common goal. The members of this team could be as
subject matter experts from different functions, say, for example, one person from
maintenance, one person from design, one person from purchasing, one person from
sales. Together they make a cross-functional team. This team is used when you're
working on it improvement project which spans over a number of functions.

• The next type of team is the Self-directed team. The self-directed team comes
together on their own. These are not formally assigned to a particular project. The
members of the self-directed team come together on their own with the minimum
input from management. For example, they see a problem; they come together to
form an informal team and work together towards that goal.
STAGES OF
GROUP
FORMATION
 FACTORS EFFECTING GROUP
COHESIVENESS
(1) Similarities of Attitudes and Values
(2) Size of the Group
(3) Cohesion

(4) Status
(5) Diversity
(6) Inter Dependency
(8) Management Behaviour
(9) Member Turnover
(10) Threat
(11) Previous Successes and Shared Goals
(12) Cooperation
FACTORS EFFECTING GROUP
COHESIVENESS
1. Size: Smaller groups are faster at completing tasks than larger ones, and
individuals perform better in smaller groups. However, in problem solving, large
groups consistently get better marks than their smaller counterparts. groups
with a dozen or more members are good for gaining diverse input. So if the goal
is fact-finding, larger groups should be more effective. Smaller groups of about
seven members are better at doing something productive with that input.
2. Status: a socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members
by others. High-status individuals are often given more freedom to deviate from
norms than are other group member. status differences actually inhibit diversity
of ideas and creativity in groups, because lower-status members tend to
participate less actively in group discussions. According to status characteristics
theory, status tends to derive from one of three source:
a. The power a person wields over others.
b. A person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals.
c. An individual’s personal characteristics.
FACTORS EFFECTING GROUP
COHESIVENESS
1. Previous success and shared goals: When a team experiences
success early in its development, members get reinforcement that their
efforts can produce results. They are more likely to be motivated to
continue to contribute. Success also creates a sense of pride that fosters
feelings of belonging and mutual attraction in the team.
2. Similarities: Similarity among group members contributes to team
cohesiveness because people with similar backgrounds are more likely to
have fewer communication barriers and share views on what constitutes
appropriate behaviors. People are generally more trusting of others when
they share some important background experiences.
FACTORS EFFECTING GROUP
COHESIVENESS
1. Diversity: diversity in the group’s membership, the degree to which members of
the group are similar to, or different from, one another. Diversity appears to
increase group conflict, especially in the early stages of a group’s tenure, which
often lowers group morale and raises dropout rates.
2. Cohesion: Groups differ in their cohesiveness—the degree to which members are
attracted to each other and motivated to stay in the group. Some work groups
are cohesive because the members have spent a great deal of time together, or
the group’s small size facilitates high interaction, or external threats have brought
members close together. The main influential factors of cohesion are size of the
group, similarities among its members, and team success. Small groups tend to
be more cohesive than larger ones because people can interact with each other
more. Similarity among group members contributes to team cohesiveness
because people with similar backgrounds are more likely to have fewer
communication barriers and share views on what constitutes appropriate
behaviors. People are generally more trusting of others when they share some
important background experiences.
Social Loafing
Social Loafing: the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working
collectively than alone. Group performance increases with group size, but the addition of
new members has diminishing returns on productivity. So more may be better in that
total productivity of a group of four is greater than that of three, but the individual
productivity of each member declines.
Effects: The free-rider effect is when one or more team members do not put in their
share of the work, assuming others will cover their shortfall. The other is the sucker
effect, where other team members reduce their effort in response to the free rider’s
behavior.
Causes: A member may not be motivated by a goal and may not want to work to
achieve it. Or a member may feel that his or her contribution to the team will not be
recognized, so the member is not motivated to contribute. Both of these causes are
more pronounced in large teams. Social loafing is also more likely when there isn’t an
individual evaluations system where the performance and contributions of members are
regularly reviewed. Finally, if there is unequal compensation and the members of the
team feel the compensation is unfair, they will be more likely to lessen their effort.
Social Loafing
• Way to reduce: A good manager should monitor employees to watch out
for these social loafers or “slackers.” The manager is responsible for making
sure all team members are carrying their fair share of the work they have
been assigned. If the manager doesn’t deal with social loafing, it can create
a stressful work environment that may turn into conflicts among coworkers.
• Set performance criteria for each individual’s contribution. Do not give
collective reward, reward must vary based on individual's performance.
Collective Efficacy
• Collective efficacy is the team’s belief that it is capable of
organizing and working together to reach its goals. Creating
collective efficacy is a bit of a balancing act. If goals are
perceived as being too easy to reach, members may not feel
they have to put in their full effort. On the other hand, if
goals are perceived to be too difficult, members may feel
their effort doesn’t matter because the goal cannot be
reached regardless of how hard they work. In either case,
social loafing may result. But when the goal is “just right,”
difficult but not impossible, the team will believe it can reach
it only if it works hard together.
• Psychologist Albert Bandura researched the relationship
between efficacy and job performance and found that each
affects the other. When a team achieves some success, it
can build self-confidence and the belief that it can achieve
more. The resulting collective efficacy, in turn, makes it more
likely that the team will be successful. But a downward spiral
POOR GROUP DYNAMICS
• Weak leadership: when a team lacks a strong leader, a more dominant
member of the group can often take charge. This can lead to a lack of direction,
infighting, or a focus on the wrong priorities.
• Excessive deference to authority: this can happen when people want to be
seen to agree with a leader, and therefore hold back from expressing their own
opinions.
• Blocking: this happens when team members behave in a way that disrupts the
flow of information in the group. People can adopt blocking roles such as:
– The aggressor: this person often disagrees with others, or is inappropriately
outspoken.
– The negator: this group member is often critical of others' ideas.
– The withdrawer: this person doesn't participate in the discussion.
– The recognition seeker: this group member is boastful, or dominates the session.
– The joker: this person introduces humor at inappropriate times
HOW TO MAKE A GROUP
EFFECTIVE?
• Team cohesion
• Team work
• Friendly environment • Personality
• Open communication • Social events
• Fit for the task • Punctuality
• Goal oriented • Crisis management
• Diverse skills • Risk management
• Sense of responsibility • Experienced leaders
• Rewards/incentives • Limit boundaries
• Training and development • Mental health sessions
• Motivation • Establish rules
• Strong leadership • Mutual growth
• Work balance
• Enabling interest
appropriate tasks
• Defined roles
• Organizational culture