2. Definition of a Group [Gordon,
2001]
In order to be considered a group 4 criteria
must be met
Members of the group must see themselves
as a unit
Group must provide rewards to its members
Anything that happens to one member of the
group affects every other member
Members of the group must share a common
goal
3. Multiple members who
perceive themselves as a unit
2 people= dyad, 3= triad, 4-20= small group
To be called a group members must see
themselves as a unit. They must know each
other.
4. Group rewards
Membership must be rewarding for each
individual in the group.
5. Corresponding Effects
Event that affects one member of a group will
affect the other group members.
6. Common goals
Aim or purpose shared by members of a
group
7. Reasons for Joining groups
Assignment- most common reason in the
workplace.
Physical proximity- people tend to form
groups with people who either live or work
nearby.
Affiliation- leadership style in which the
individual leads by caring about others and
that is most effective in a climate of anxiety
8. Reasons for Joining groups-affiliation
One reason people join groups is to be near
and talk to other people.
Research has shown that close proximity with
co-workers increases job satisfaction.
9. Reasons for Joining groups -
Identification
The need to associate ourselves with the
image projected by other people, groups, or
objects.
“basking in reflected glory”
To promote loyalty to the organization
10. Reasons for Joining groups
Emotional support
Assistance or help
Common interests-common academic interests are
not as strong as social interests.
Common goals- best example would be people who
join political parties. While they may have common
interests, their primary purpose is to get a particular
person or members of a particular party elected to
office.
11. Factors affecting group
performance
Group cohesiveness- extent to which
members of a group like and trust one
another, are committed to accomplishing a
team goal, and share a feeling of group pride
Good group cohesiveness increases 1)
productivity and efficiency 2) decision quality
3) member satisfaction 4) member interaction
5) employee courtesy
12. Factors affecting group
performance
Group cohesiveness can also lower group
performance, especially in a work setting. This is
because you tend to care more about your co-workers
needs than those of your customers.
*loyalty*
Group cohesion is not always necessary for group
success.
Employees in cohesive work groups will conform to
a norm of lower production even though they are
capable of higher performance.
13. Group Homogeneity
Homogeneous groups- groups whose
members share the same characteristics
Heterogeneous groups- members share FEW
similarities.
Slightly heterogeneous- FEW group
members have different characteristics from
the rest of the group
14. Group Homogeneity
When developing a group which composition will
lead to the best group performance?
Research shows that the best working groups
consist primarily of similar people but have a
dissimilar person adding tension and a different
vantage point.
Although group performance is best in slightly
heterogeneous groups, the group member who is
“different” may not have the same level of
satisfaction as the rest of the group members.
15. Stability of Groups
Stability- extent to which the membership of a
group remains constant over time. The
greater the stability of a group, the greater
the cohesiveness.
16. Isolation
Isolation- degree of physical distance of a
group from other groups.
Groups that are located away from other
groups tend to be highly cohesive
17. Outside Pressure
Outside pressure- amount of psychological pressure
placed on a group by people who are not members
of the group
Groups that are pressured by outside forces also
tend to become highly cohesive
The response to outside pressure can be explained
by the phenomenon of psychological reactance
Reactance- motive to protect or restore one’s sense
of freedom. Reactance arises when someone
threatens our freedom of action.
18. Group Size
Group size- number of members in a group
Groups are most cohesive and perform best
when group size is small.
Studies have shown that larger groups have
lower productivity *social loafing?*, less
coordination and lower morale and are less
active, less cohesive, and more critical than
smaller group.
19. Group Size
Research suggests that groups perform best
and have greatest member satisfaction when
they consist of ~ 5 members.
Additive tasks- tasks for which the group’s
performance is equal to the sum of the
performances of each individual group
member.
Each member’s contribution is important.
20. Group Size
Conjunctive tasks- task for which the group’s
performance is dependent on the
performance of the least effective group
member.
Success is limited by the least effective
member, therefore smaller group is usually
best.
21. Group Size
Social impact theory- the addition of a group
member has the greatest effect on group
behaviour when the size of the group is
small.
*Adding a 6th person to an already stable and
cohesive versus adding a person to a group
with a gazillion people*
22. Group Size
Research indicates that groups working through a
computer behave differently from groups working
face to face.
Computers= large groups appear to perform best
and have the most satisfied members. Also,
members whose opinion is in the minority are more
likely to express opinions than when the group
meets face to face. (anonymity?) These same
minority group members are more persuasive when
the group meets face to face.
23. Group status
Group status- esteem in which the group is
held by people not in the group. The higher it
is, the greater the group’s cohesiveness.
It is not important to ACTUALLY have high
status, but it is important that the members
BELIEVE they have high status.
24. Group Ability and Confidence
Groups whose members believe that their
team can be successful both at a specific
task [high team efficacy] and at tasks in
general [high team potency] perform better
than groups whose members aren’t as
confident about their probability for success.
25. Personality of the group
members.
Important factor that affects group
performance
Meta-analysis results indicate that in general,
groups whose members have task-related
experience and score high in the personality
dimensions of openness to experience and
emotional stability [neuroticism] will perform
better than groups whose members do not
have these characteristics (Bell,2007).
26. Personality of the group
members.
Groups working on intellectual tasks will do
better if their group members are bright, and
groups working on physical tasks will do
better if their group members score high in
the personality dimensions of
conscientiousness, extraversion, and
agreeableness. (Bell, 2005)
*OCEAN* from Psych150
27. Communication Structure
Communication structure- manner in which
members of a group communicate with one
another.
Which communication structure is most
effective? It depends on the situation and
goals of the group because each structure
has its advantages and disadvantages.
Chain, Centralized, circles & open
28.
29. Group Roles
For a group to be successful, its members’ roles
must fall into one of two categories: task oriented
and social oriented.
Task-oriented roles include behaviours such as
offering new ideas, coordinating activities, and
finding new information.
Social-oriented roles involve encouraging
cohesiveness and participation
Individual role- blocks group activities, calling
attention to oneself, and avoiding group interaction.
30. Group Roles
Group members will often naturally assume
roles on the basis of their individual
personalities and experiences.
31. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Norman Triplett- conducted a study in which children
conducted a task either alone or while competing
against other children. First study on social
facilitation and social inhibition.
Social Facilitation(+) – positive effects that occur
when a person performs a task in the presence of
others.
Social Inhibition (-) – negative effects that occur
when a person performs a task in the presence of
others.
32. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Audience effects- effect on behaviour when one or
more people passively watch the behaviour of
another person.
Strength of the effect of having an audience present
is a function of at least three factors (Latane, 1981):
audience’s size, its physical proximity to the person
or group, and its status.
Meta-analysis results indicate that the presence of
others increases performance in people who are
extraverts and have high self-esteem and decreases
performance in people with low self-esteem and who
score high in neuroticism (Uziel, 2007)
33. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Coaction- effect on behaviour when two or more people are
performing the same task in the presence of each other. *running
partners*
Shalley (1995) found that coaction decreased creativity and
productivity.
Rockloff and Dyer (2007) found that gamblers larger bets and
lost money when gambling near others than when gambling
alone
Sommer, Wynes, and Brinkley (1992) when people shopped in
groups, they spent more time in a store and purchased more
goods when alone
De Castro and Brewer (1992) meals eaten in larger groups were
75% larger than those eaten when a person was alone.
34. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Performance increases only when the task
being performed is easy or well learned;
performance decreases when the task is
difficult or not well learned (Bond & Titus,
1983; Platania & Moran, 2001)
Mere presence: theory stating that the very
fact that others happen to be present
naturally produces arousal and thus may
affect performance
35. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Comparison- effect when an individual
working on a task compares his or her
performance with that of another person
performing the same task. In some jobs, this
comparison effect may increase competition
and production quantity, whereas in other
jobs comparison effects may cause
employees to slow down to be in line with the
working norm
36. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Evaluation apprehension- the idea that a
person performing a task becomes aroused
because he or she is concerned that others
are evaluating his or her performance.
Distracting- idea that social inhibition occurs
because the presence of others provides a
distraction that interferes with concentration.
37. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Social loafing- fact that individuals in a group often exert less
individual effort than they would if they were not in a group.
Why does social loafing occur?
One theory is that because group members realize that their
individual efforts will not be noticed, there is little chance of
individual reward.
Free-rider theory- when things are going well, a group member
realizes that his effort is not necessary and thus does not work
as hard as he would if they were alone. Support for this theory
comes from meta-analysis results showing that people don’t
socially loaf when their individual inputs are unique and can’t be
performed by other group members.
38. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Sucker effect- social loafing occurs when a group
member notices that other group members are not
working hard and thus are “playing him for a
sucker”. To avoid this situation, the individual lowers
his work performance to match those of the other
members. Does not explain the social loafing of
other members.
Social loafing is an important variable to keep in
mind; having employees work together on a project
may not be as productive *HAHAHAHAHAHA* as
having them work individually.
39. Presence of others: Social
Facilitation and Inhibition
Social loafing can be reduced by evaluating
employees on their individual contributions to
the group (Karau & Williams, 1993),
explaining the link between individual effort
and group performance (Shepperd & Taylor,
1999), and rewarding those who achieve
(George, 1995; Shepperd, 1993).
41. Groupthink
Groupthink- a state of mind in which a group
is so concerned about its own cohesiveness
that it ignores important information.
Members become so cohesive and like-minded
that they make poor decisions
despite contrary information that might
reasonably lead them to other options
(hubris?)
Group think most often occurs when the
group
42. Groupthink
Is cohesive
Is insulted from qualified outsiders
Has an illusion of invulnerability, infallibility, or both
Believes that it is morally superior to its adversaries
Is under great pressure to conform
Has a leader who promotes a favourite solution
Has gatekeepers who keep information from other
group members
43. Groupthink
Groupthink can be reduced in several ways
The group leader should not state his own position
or beliefs until late in the decision-making process
The leader should promote open discussion and
encourage group members to speak
A group or committee can be separated into
subgroups to increase the chance of disagreement
One group member can be assigned the role of
devil’s advocate
Devil’s Advocate- group member who intentionally
provides an opposing opinion to that expressed by
the leader or the majority of the group.
44. Individual versus Group
Performance
Nominal group- collection of individuals whose results are pooled
but who never interact with one another
Interacting group- a collection of individuals who work together to
perform a task.
Importance of the difference between nominal and interacting
groups can be found in a study by Liden et al.
Managers, nominal groups of employees, and interacting groups
of employees read scenarios about a group member’s poor
performance and then determine how the employee should be
disciplined.
Interacting groups and managers decided on more severe levels
of discipline than did the nominal groups.
45. Individual versus Group
Performance
Brainstorming- technique in which ideas are generated by people
in a group setting.
Not that effective
Group members are encouraged to say aloud any and all ideas
that come to mind and are not allowed to comment on the ideas
until all have been given.
When research compares a brainstorming group’s creativity with
that of a single individual, the brainstorming group will almost
always be more creative
When comparing the number and quality of ideas created by
nominal groups with the quality and ideas by an interacting group
in a brainstorming session, the ideas of the nominal group are
more creative and of higher quality then the ideas of the
interacting group.
46. Individual versus Group
Performance
DeRosa et al. found that electronic
brainstorming groups outperform vis-à-vis
interacting groups. The comparison with
nominal groups is more complicated.
Electronic brainstorming groups and nominal
groups appear to perform at equal levels
when the groups are small, but electronic
groups are superior when the group is large.
47. Individual versus Group
Performance
Brophy (1996) found nominal groups to be most effective with a
single brainstorming problem and interacting groups to be most
effective with complex problems.
Davis and Harless (1996) interacting groups take better
advantage of feedback and learning and thus outperform nominal
groups.
Group polarization- tendency for groups to take extreme
positions than the positions of individual members. Group
members will shift their beliefs to a more extreme version of what
they already believe individually. If individual group members are
on the risky side, the group will make highly risky decisions. If,
however, the individual group members are conservative or
cautious, the group as a whole will be extremely cautious
(Isenberg, 1986). *birds of the same feather, flock together?*
48. Teams
Devine et al.- a work team is a collection of
three or more individuals who interact to
provide organizational product, plan,
decision, or service.
Work best in situations in which 1) job
requires high level of employee interaction,
2)a team approach will simplify the job, 3) a
team cannot do something an individual
cannot, 4) there is time to create a team and
properly train team members.
49. Teams
Several factors must be considered before calling a
group of individuals a team.
Identification- extent to which group members
identify with the team rather than with other groups.
*Student council course reps*
Interdependence- extent to which team members
need and rely on other team members
Power differentiation- extent to which team
members have the same level of power and respect.
Social distance- extent to which team members treat
each other in a friendly , informal manner *How we
interact with Carby*
50. Teams
Conflict management tactics- team members
respond to conflict by collaborating versus
nonteam members respond by forcing and
accommodating
Negotiation Process- teams negotiate in a
win-win style vs nonteams where members
negotiate so that they win and the other
members lose
51. Teams
Donnellon (1996) placed teams into one of five
categories
Collaborative and emergent = true teams
Nominal and doomed= nonteams
Adversarial= somewhere in between true team and
nonteam
Permanency- extent to which a team will remain
together or be disbanded after a task has been
accomplished
Proximity- physical distance between people
Virtual teams- teams that communicate through
email rather than face-to-face
52. Types of Teams
Work teams- groups of employees who manage
themselves, design jobs, plan and schedule work,
make work-related decisions, and solve work related
problems
Parallel/Cross-functional teams- consists of
representatives from various departments
Project teams- groups formed to produce onetime
outputs such as creating a new product, installing a
new software system, or hiring a new employee
Management teams- coordinate, manage, advise,
and direct employees and teams.
53. Tuckman’s Stages
Forming- team members “feel out” the team
concept and attempt to make a positive
impression. During the latter part of this
stage, the team concentrates on clarifying its
mission, determining the goals it wants to
accomplish, deciding on the tasks to be done
to accomplish their goals, setting rules and
procedures, and developing alternate
courses of action to reach their goals *more
than one way to skin a cat*
54. Tuckman’s Stages
Storming- group members disagree and
resist their team roles. On an individual level,
members often become frustrated with their
roles, show the stress of balancing their
previous duties with their new team
responsibilities, and question whether they
have the ability to accomplish the goals set in
the forming stage.
55. Tuckman’s Stages
Norming- teams establish roles and
determine policies and procedures. Members
begin to acknowledge the reality of the team
by accepting the team leader and working
directly with other team members to solve
difficulties.
56. Tuckman’s Stages
Performing- teams work toward
accomplishing their goals. Members make
innovative suggestions, challenge one
another without defensive responses and
participate at high levels.
57. Tuckman’s Stages
Adjourning- involves completing the task and
breaking up the team.
58. Why teams don’t always work
The team is not a team
Excessive meeting requirements
Lack of empowerment
Lack of skill
Distrust of the team process
Unclear objectives
59. Group Conflict
Conflict- psychological and behavioural reaction to a
perception that another person is keeping you from
reaching a goal, taking away your right to behave in
a particular way, or violating the expectancies of a
relationship.
One of the key components to conflict is perception
*recall 180 lecture on how we create our own social
worlds*
Dysfunctional conflict- conflict that keeps people
from working together, lessens productivity, spreads
to other areas, or increases turnover
60. Group Conflict
Functional Conflict- results in increased
performance or better interpersonal relations
61. Types of Conflict
Interpersonal conflict- between two people
Individual-group conflict – between an
individual and other group members
Group-group conflict – between two or more
groups
62. Causes of Conflict
Competition for resources- occurs when the demand
for resources is greater than the resources available
Task Interdependence- arises when the completion
of a task by one person affects the completion of a
task by another person
Jurisdictional ambiguity- caused by a disagreement
about geographical territory or lines of authority
Communication barriers- physical, cultural, and
psychological obstacles that interfere with
successful communication and create a source of
conflict.
63. Causes of Conflict
Belief system of individuals or groups- most likely to
occur when individuals or groups believe that they
Are superior to other people or groups
Have been mistreated by others
Are vulnerable to others and are in harm’s way
Cannot trust others
Are helpless or powerless (Eidelson & Eidelson,
2003)
64. Causes of Conflict
Personality- relatively stable traits possessed
by an individual
65. Types of Difficult people
Tank- Control, task completion. Pushes, yells, gives orders,
intimidates. Don’t counterattack or offer excuses. Hold your
ground.
Sniper- control, task completion. Uses sarcasm, criticizes,
humiliates others. Call them on their sarcasm and have them
explain what was really behind their comment
Know-it-all – control, task completion. Dominates conversations,
doesn’t listen. Acknowledge their knowledge, make your
statements appear as if they are in agreement
Whiner- perfection, task quality. Constantly complains. Focus
their complaints on specifics and solutions
No person- perfection, task quality. Disagrees with everything.
Don’t rush them or argue; acknowledge their good intentions
66. Types of Difficult people
Nothing person- perfection, task quality. Doesn’t do anything. Be
patient and ask them open-ended questions.
Yes person- approval, being liked. Agrees to everything. Talk
honestly and let the person know it is safe to disagree with you
Maybe person- approval, being liked. Won’t commit or make a
decision. Help them learn a decision-making system, and then
reassure bout the decisions they make
Grenade-attention, being appreciated. Throws tantrums. Don’t
show anger, acknowledge their complaint, and give them a
chance to cool down.
Friendly sniper- attention, being appreciated. Use jokes to pick
on people. Give them attention when they are not making fun of
you.
67. Types of Difficult people
Think they know It all- attention, appreciated.
Exaggerates, lies, gives advice. Give them
attention and ask them for specifics, don’t
embarrass them.
68. Conflict Styles
Avoiding style- pretending it doesn’t exist. Ok
with minor and infrequent conflicts.
Withdrawal- one of the parties removes
him/herself from the situation
Triangling- an employee discusses a conflict
with a third party such as a friend or
supervisor. In doing so, the employee hopes
that the third party will talk to the second
party and that the conflict will be resolved
without the need for the two parties to meet
69. Conflict Styles
Accommodating style- a person who tends to
respond to conflict by giving in to the other person
Forcing style- responds to conflict by always trying
to win
Winning at all costs- one side seeks to win
regardless of the damage to the other side
Collaborating style- both sides get what they want
Compromising style- an individual allows each side
to get some of what it wants
70. Conflict Styles
Negotiation and bargaining- a method of resolving
conflict in which two sides use verbal skill and
strategy to reach an agreement
Least acceptable result (LAR)- lowest settlement
that a person is willing to accept in a negotiated
agreement
Maximum supportable position (MSP)- highest
possible settlement that a person could reasonably
ask for and still maintain credibility in negotiating a
agreement
71. Conflict Styles
Seltz and Modica’s (1980) indicators that tell
when a negotiation is going to end
Number of counterarguments is reduced
Position of the two sides appear close
together
Other side talks about final arrangements
Other side appears willing to begin putting
things into writing
72. Resolving Conflict
Dispute- situation when two parties do not agree
Cooperative problem solving- method of resolving
conflict in which two sides get together to discuss a
problem and arrive at a solution
Third party intervention- neutral party is asked to
resolve a conflict
Mediation- method of resolving conflict in which a
neutral third party is asked to help the two parties
reach an agreement
Arbitration- method of resolving conflicts in which a
neutral third party is asked to choose which side is
correct.