organizational behavior
organizational behavior
H.M.A. Herath
Department of Business Management
Wayamba University of Sri Lanka
Foundations of
Group Behavior
OBJECTIVES
After studying this lesson,
you should be able to:
1. Differentiate between formal and informal
groups.
2. Compare two models of group development.
LEARNING
3. Explain how role requirements change in
different situations.
4. Describe how norms exert influence on an
individual’s behavior.
5. Explain what determines status
6. Define social loafing and its effect on group
performance.
O B J E C T I V E S (cont’d)
After studying this lesson,
you should be able to:
7. Identify the benefits and disadvantages of
cohesive groups.
8. List the strengths and weaknesses of group
decision making.
9. Contrast the effectiveness of interacting,
brainstorming, nominal and electronic meeting
groups.
LEARNING
Defining
Defining Groups
Groups
In general a number of people together at a given place can
be considered as a group.
A collection of two or more interacting individuals with a
stable pattern of relationship between them who share
common goals and who perceive themselves as being a
group (Forsyth D.L).
Two or more persons who interact regularly to accomplish
a common purpose or goal (Ricky W. Griffin).
Two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent,
who have come together to achieve particular objectives
(Stephen P. Robbins).
Two or more freely interacting individuals who share
collective norms and goals and have a common identity
(Kreitner and Kinicki).
Common
Common Features
Features
According to the definitions, it can be identified
following common features of a work group
Share Common Goals
Collection of two or more people
Stable pattern of relationships
Perceive themselves as being a group
If groups exists in organizations, its members:
Are motivated to join
Perceive the group as a unified unit of interacting
people
Contribute in various amounts to the group processes
Reach agreements and have disagreements through
various forms of interactions
(Luthans)
Theodore Newcomb’s Balance Theory
People are attracted to one another on the basis of similar
attitudes towards commonly relevant objects and goals
Exchange
Exchange Theory-
Theory- (Benefit
(Benefit Theory)
Theory)
The
The reward-cost
reward-cost outcomes
outcomes ofof interactions
interactions serve
serve as
as the
the
basis
basis for
for group
group formation
formation Dynamics
Dynamics of of Group
Group Formation
Formation
Classifying
Classifying groups
groups
Formal groups Informal groups
Command groups Tasks groups Interests groups Friendship groups
Standing
Tasks forces
committees
Vertical cliques Horizontal cliques Mixed cliques
Classifying
Classifying Groups
Groups (cont’d)
(cont’d)
Formal Group Informal Group
A designated work A group that is neither
group defined by the formally structured no
organization’s organizationally
structure. determined; appears in
response to the need for
social contact.
Classifying
Classifying Groups
Groups (cont’d)
(cont’d)
Group Development process
Five Stage Model
Stages
Stages of
of Group
Group Development
Development
An
An Alternative
Alternative Model:
Model: Temporary
Temporary Groups
Groups with
with
Deadlines
Deadlines
Punctuated-
Equilibrium Model
Temporary groups
Sequence
Sequenceof
ofactions:
actions:
go through
1.1. Setting
Settinggroup
groupdirection
transitions between direction
inertia and activity. 2.2. First
Firstphase
phaseof
ofinertia
inertia
3.3. Half-way
Half-waypoint
pointtransition
transition
4.4. Major
Majorchanges
changes
5.5. Second
Secondphase
phaseofofinertia
inertia
6.6. Accelerated
Acceleratedactivity
activity
The
The Punctuated-Equilibrium
Punctuated-Equilibrium Model
Model
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Roles
Roles
Role(s)
A set of expected behavior patterns
attributed to someone occupying a given
position in a social unit.
Role Identity
Certain attitudes and behaviors
consistent with a role.
Role Perception
An individual’s view of how he or
she is supposed to act in a given
situation.
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Roles
Roles (cont’d)
(cont’d)
Role Expectations
How others believe a
person should act in a
given situation.
Psychological Contract
An unwritten agreement that
sets out what management
expects from the employee and
vice versa.
Role Conflict
A situation in which an individual is
confronted by divergent role expectations.
Roles
Roles in
in informal
informal Groups
Groups
Contributor
Collaborator
Communicator
Challenger
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Norms
Norms
Norms
Acceptable standards of behavior within a
group that are shared by the group’s
members.
Classes
Classesof
ofNorms:
Norms:
•• Performance
Performancenorms
norms
•• Appearance
Appearancenorms
norms
•• Social
Socialarrangement
arrangementnorms
norms
•• Allocation
Allocationof
ofresources
resources
norms
norms
Findings
Findings of
of the
the Hawthorne
Hawthorne Studies
Studies
A series of studies undertaken by Elton Mayo at Western
Electric Company’s Hawthorne Works in Chicago between
1924 and 1932.
Research Conclusions:
– Worker behavior and sentiments were closely related.
– Group influences (norms) were significant in affecting
individual behavior.
– Group standards (norms) were highly effective in
establishing individual worker output.
– Money was less a factor in determining worker output
than were group standards, sentiments, and security.
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Norms
Norms (cont’d)
(cont’d)
Conformity
Adjusting one’s behavior to
align with the norms of the
group.
Reference Groups
Important groups to
which individuals belong
or hope to belong and
with whose norms
individuals are likely to
conform.
Examples
Examples of
of Cards
Cards Used
Used in
in Asch’s
Asch’s Study
Study
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Norms
Norms (cont’d)
(cont’d)
Deviant Workplace Behavior
Antisocial actions by organizational
members that intentionally violate
established norms and result in negative
consequences for the organization, its
members, or both.
Typology
Typology of
of Deviant
Deviant Workplace
Workplace Behavior
Behavior
Category Examples
Production Leaving early
Intentionally working slowly
Wasting resources
Property Sabotage
Lying about hours worked
Stealing from the organization
Political Showing favoritism
Gossiping and spreading rumors
Blaming coworkers
Personal Aggression Sexual harassment
Verbal abuse
Stealing from coworkers
Source: Adapted from S.L. Robinson, and R.J. Bennett. “A Typology of Deviant Workplace
Behaviors: A Multidimensional Scaling Study,” Academy of Management Journal, April 1995, p. 565.
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Status
Status
Status
A socially defined position or rank given to groups
or group members by others.
Group
GroupNorms
Norms
Group
GroupMember
Member
Status
StatusEquity
Equity Status
Status
Culture
Culture
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Size
Size
Social Loafing
The tendency for individuals to expend less
effort when working collectively than when
working individually.
Performance
g )
d
if n
te
a
ec
lo
p
t o
Ex
u e
( d
u al
c t
A
Group Size
Group
GroupStructure
Structure--Composition
Composition
Group Demography
The degree to which members of a group share a
common demographic attribute, such as age, sex, race,
educational level, or length of service in the organization,
and the impact of this attribute on turnover.
Cohorts
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Cohesiveness
Cohesiveness
Group cohesiveness is the extent to which a group is committed to staying together.
Factors to increase cohesiveness Results of high cohesiveness
• Goal accomplishment
• Homogeneous composition
• Satisfaction of members
• Mature development • Increased quality and quantity
of interactions
• Relatively small size • group think
• Frequent interactions
• Clear goals
Group
Group Structure
Structure -- Cohesiveness
Cohesiveness
Factors to decrease cohesiveness Results of Low cohesiveness
• Heterogeneous •Difficulty in achieving goals
composition
•Increased likelihood of
•Recent formation disbanding
•Fever interactions
•Large size
•Individual orientation
•Physical dispersion
•Lower commitment to group
•Ambiguous goals goals
•Failure
Increasing
Increasinggroup
groupcohesiveness:
cohesiveness:
1.1. Make
Makethe
thegroup
groupsmaller.
smaller.
2.2. Encourage
Encourageagreement
agreementwith
withgroup
groupgoals.
goals.
3.3. Increase
Increasetime
timemembers
membersspend
spendtogether.
together.
4.4. Increase
Increasegroup
groupstatus
statusand
andadmission
admissiondifficultly.
difficultly.
5.5. Stimulate
Stimulatecompetition
competitionwith
withother
othergroups.
groups.
6.6. Give
Giverewards
rewardstotothe
thegroup,
group,not
notindividuals.
individuals.
7.7. Physically
Physicallyisolate
isolatethe
thegroup.
group.
Relationship
Relationship Between
Between Group
Group Cohesiveness,
Cohesiveness,
Performance
Performance Norms,
Norms, and
and Productivity
Productivity
Cohesiveness,
Cohesiveness, induction
induction and
and productivity
productivity
The Schachter Study
Tested the effect of group cohesiveness and
induction (influence) on productivity.
Four experimental groups were tested
• High cohesive, positive induction
• Low cohesive, positive induction
• High cohesive, negative induction
• Low cohesive, positive induction
Group
Group processes
processes
Communication
Synergy
Synergy
Group decision making Action
Actionof oftwo
twoorormore
more
Leader behaviour substances that results
substances that results
ininan
aneffect
effectthat
thatisis
Power dynamics different
differentfrom
fromthe
the
individual
individual summationof
summation of
Conflicts the substances
the substances
Interactions 11++11++11==33
Social
Socialfacilitation
facilitationeffect
effect
The
Thetendency
tendencyfor for
performance
performance toimprove
to improve
or
or decline in responseto
decline in response to
the presence of others
the presence of others
S. Adams, Build a Better Life by Stealing Office Supplies (Kansas City MO: Andrews &
McMeal, 1991), p. 31. Dilbert reprinted with permission of United Features Syndicate, Inc.
Group
Group Tasks
Tasks
Decision-making
– Large groups facilitate the pooling of
information about complex tasks.
– Smaller groups are better suited to coordinating
and facilitating the implementation of complex
tasks.
– Simple, routine standardized tasks reduce the
requirement that group processes be effective
in order for the group to perform well.
Group
Group Decision
Decision Making
Making
Strengths Weaknesses
– More complete – More time
information consuming
– Increased (slower)
diversity of views – Increased
– Higher quality of pressure to
decisions (more conform
accuracy) – Domination by
– Increased one or a few
acceptance of members
solutions – Ambiguous
responsibility
Group
Group Decision
Decision Making
Making (cont’d)
(cont’d)
Groupthink
Phenomenon in which the norm for consensus
overrides the realistic appraisal of alternative
course of action.
Groupshift
A change in decision risk between the group’s
decision and the individual decision that
member within the group would make; can be
either toward conservatism or greater risk.
Symptoms
Symptoms Of
Of The
The Groupthink
Groupthink Phenomenon
Phenomenon
Group members rationalize any resistance to the
assumptions they have made.
Members apply direct pressures on those who
express doubts about shared views or who
question the alternative favored by the majority.
Members who have doubts or differing points of
view keep silent about misgivings.
There appears to be an illusion of unanimity.
Group
Group Decision-Making
Decision-Making Techniques
Techniques
Interacting Groups
Typical groups, in which the members interact
with each other face-to-face.
Nominal Group Technique
A group decision-making method in which
individual members meet face-to-face to pool
their judgments in a systematic but
independent fashion.
Group
Group Decision-Making
Decision-Making Techniques
Techniques
Brainstorming
An idea-generation process that specifically
encourages any and all alternatives, while
withholding any criticism of those
alternatives.
Electronic Meeting
A meeting in which
members interact on
computers, allowing for
anonymity of comments and
aggregation of votes.
Evaluating
Evaluating Group
Group Effectiveness
Effectiveness
TYPE OF GROUP
Effectiveness Criteria Interacting Brainstorming Nominal
Electronic
Number and quality of ideas Low Moderate High High
Social pressure High Low Moderate Low
Money costs Low Low Low High
Speed Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Task orientation Low High High High
Potential for interpersonal conflict High Low Moderate
Low
Commitment to solution High Not applicable Moderate Moderate
Development of High High Moderate Low
group cohesiveness
Threats
Threats to
to Group
Group Effectiveness
Effectiveness
Social Loafing
The tendency for individuals to expend less effort
when working collectively than when working
individually.
Asch effect
The distortion of individual judgment by incorrect
position
Group think
Few alternatives in decision making
Free Riding Tendency
Attempt of group member to minimize his/her costs
relative to the benefits they received.
Groups
Groups and
and Teams
Teams
