3. Learning Objectives
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
Define group, and distinguish the different types of
groups.
Identify the five stages of group development.
Show how role requirements change in different
situations.
Demonstrate how norms and status exert influence
on an individual’s behavior.
9-3
4. Decision making.
Compare the effectiveness of interacting, brainstorming, and the
nominal group technique
Show how group size affects group performance.
Contrast the benefits and disadvantages of cohesive groups.
Explain the implications of diversity for group effectiveness.
Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of group
9-4
6. Define Group, and Differentiate
Between Different Types of Groups
Groups can be either formal or informal.
Formal groups – those defined by the
organization’s structure.
Informal groups – alliances that are neither
formally structured nor organizationally
determined.
9-6
7. Define Group, and Differentiate
Between Different Types of Groups
•Social identity theory – considers when and
why individuals consider themselves members
of groups.
•People have emotional reactions to the failure
or success of their group because their self-
esteem gets tied into the performance of the
group.
•Social identities help us understand who we
are and where we fit in with people.
9-7
8. DEFINE GROUP, AND DIFFERENTIATE
BETWEEN DIFFERENT TYPES OF GROUPS
• In-group favoritism
• Several characteristics make a social identity
important to a person
• Similarity
• Distinctiveness
• Status
• Uncertainty reduction
9-8
10. IDENTIFY THE FIVE STAGES OF
GROUP DEVELOPMENT
• Group Effectiveness
• Groups proceed through the stages of group
development at different rates.
• Those with a strong sense of purpose and strategy
rapidly achieve high performance and improve over
time.
• Similarly, groups that begin with a positive social
focus appear to achieve the “performing” stage
more rapidly.
9-10
12. Show How Role Requirements
Change In Different Situations
◦ Role – a set of expected behavior patterns attributed to
someone occupying a given position in a social unit.
◦ Role perception – one’s perception of how to act in
a given situation.
◦ Role expectations – how others believe one should
act in a given situation.
◦ Psychological contract
◦ Role conflict – situation in which an individual faces
divergent role expectations.
◦ Zimbardo’s prison experiment 9-12
3
14. DEMONSTRATE HOW NORMS AND STATUS
EXERT INFLUENCE ON AN INDIVIDUAL’S BEHAVIOR
• Norms – acceptable standards of behavior
within a group that are shared by the
group’s members.
• Performance norms
• Appearance norms
• Social arrangement norms
• Resource allocation norms
• The Hawthorne Studies 9-14
15. LO 4
DEMONSTRATE HOW NORMS AND STATUS
EXERT INFLUENCE ON AN INDIVIDUAL’S
BEHAVIOR
9-15
16. LO 4DEMONSTRATE HOW NORMS AND STATUS
EXERT INFLUENCE ON AN INDIVIDUAL’S
BEHAVIOR
9-16
17. DEMONSTRATE HOW NORMS AND STATUS
EXERT INFLUENCE ON AN INDIVIDUAL’S
BEHAVIOR
Status – a socially defined position or rank
given to groups or group members by others.
Status characteristics theory – differences in
status characteristics create status
hierarchies within groups.
Status is derived from one of three sources:
The power a person wields over others.
A person’s ability to contribute to a
group’s goals.
An individual’s personal characteristics.
9-17
18. Demonstrate How Norms and Status
Exert Influence On an Individual’s Behavior
Status and Norms
High status individuals often have more
freedom to deviate from norms.
Status and Group Interaction
High status people are often more assertive.
Status Inequity
Perceived inequity creates disequilibrium and
can lead to resentment and corrective
behavior.
Status and Stigmatization 9-18
19. SHOW HOW GROUP SIZE AFFECTS
GROUP PERFORMANCE
• Group size affects the group’s overall
behavior.
• Large groups are good for gaining diverse
input.
• Smaller groups are better doing
something with input.
• Social loafing – the tendency for individuals
to expend less effort when working
collectively than alone.
9-19
21. Explain the Implications of
Diversity For Group Effectiveness
Diversity – the degree to which members of
the group are similar to, or different from,
one another.
Increases group conflict especially in the
short term.
May perform better over time. more open-
minded and creative.
Faultiness
9-
21
22. Contrast the Strengths and
Weaknesses of Group Decision Making
◦ Strengths of group decision making:
◦ More complete information and knowledge
◦ Increased diversity of views
◦ Increased acceptance of solutions
◦ Weaknesses of group decision making:
◦ Time consuming
◦ Conformity pressures
◦ Dominance of a few members
◦ Ambiguous responsibility
9-22
25. CONTRAST THE STRENGTHS AND
WEAKNESSES OF GROUP DECISION
MAKING
• Groupthink – situations in which group pressures for
conformity deter the group from critically appraising unusual,
minority, or unpopular views.
• Related to norms
• Groupshift – a change between a group’s decision and an
individual decision that a member within the group would make.
9-25
26. COMPARE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
INTERACTING, BRAINSTORMING, AND
THE NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE
• Most group decision making takes place in
interacting groups.
• Members meet face-to-face and rely on
both verbal and nonverbal interaction to
communicate
• Interacting groups often censor themselves
and pressure individual members toward
conformity of opinion.
9-26
27. COMPARE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
INTERACTING, BRAINSTORMING, AND
THE NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE
• Brainstorming can overcome pressures for
conformity.
• In a brainstorming session:
• The group leader states the problem
clearly.
• Members then “free-wheel” as many
alternatives as they can.
• No criticism is allowed.
• One idea stimulates others, and group
9-27
28. COMPARE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
INTERACTING, BRAINSTORMING, AND THE
NOMINAL GROUP TECHNIQUE
• The nominal group technique - restricts
discussion or interpersonal communication
during the decision making process.
• Group members are all physically present.
• The main advantage is that it permits the
group to meet formally,
• Research shows that nominal groups
outperform brainstorming groups.
9-28
29. Compare the Effectiveness of Interacting,
Brainstorming, and the Nominal Group Technique
• In a nominal group, a problem is presented,
then…
• Each member independently writes down
his/her ideas on the problem.
• After this silent period, each member presents
one idea to the group.
• The ideas are discussed for clarity.
• Each group member rank-orders the ideas.
• The idea with the highest aggregate ranking
determines the final decision.
9-29
31. IMPLICATIONS FOR
MANAGERS
• Consider that the degree of congruence
between the employee’s and the manager’s
perception of the employee’s job influences
the degree to which the manager will judge
that employee effective.
• Be certain your employees fully
understand their roles so you can
accurately assess their performance.
9-31
32. IMPLICATIONS FOR
MANAGERS
• In group situations where the norms support
high output, you can expect markedly higher
individual performance than when the norms
restrict output.
• Group norms that support antisocial
behavior increase the likelihood that
individuals will engage in deviant
workplace activities.
9-32
33. IMPLICATIONS FOR
MANAGERS
• Pay attention to the organizational status
levels of the employee groups you create.
• Because lower-status people tend to
participate less in group discussions,
groups with high status differences are
likely to inhibit input from lower-status
members and reduce their potential.
9-33
34. IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS
• When forming employee groups, use larger
groups for fact-finding activities and smaller
groups for action-taking tasks.
• When creating larger groups, you should
also provide measures of individual
performance.
• To increase employee satisfaction, work on
making certain your employees perceive their
job roles the same way you perceive their
9-34
Welcome to this Organizational Behavior course that uses the 16th edition of the textbook, Organizational Behavior by Robbins and Judge. This is considered among the most widely used OB textbooks in the world. Robbins and Judge are recognized as definitive aggregators of OB concepts, applications, and practices. The course and this book will provide you with a resource that will benefit you throughout your degree program and your professional life.
Chapter 9: Foundations of Group Behavior
We begin this chapter with the learning objectives:
Define group, and distinguish the different types of groups.
Identify the five stages of group development.
Show how role requirements change in different situations.
Demonstrate how norms and status exert influence on an individual’s behavior.
Show how group size affects group performance.
Contrast the benefits and disadvantages of cohesive groups.
Explain the implications of diversity for group effectiveness.
Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of group decision making.
Compare the effectiveness of interacting, brainstorming, and the nominal group technique.
A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives. Groups can be either formal or informal.
Formal groups, like an airline flight crew, are those defined by the organization’s structure, with designated work assignments establishing tasks. The behaviors that one should engage in are stipulated by and directed toward organizational goals. In contrast, informal groups are alliances that are neither formally structured nor organizationally determined, but instead are natural formations in the work environment in response to the need for social contact. So, for example, three employees from different departments who regularly eat lunch together is an informal group.
Why do people form groups? Our tendency to take personal pride or offense for the accomplishments of a group is the territory of social identity theory.
Social identity theory proposes that people have emotional reactions to the failure or success of their group because their self-esteem gets tied into the performance of the group. Social identities help us understand who we are and where we fit in with other people, but they can have a negative side as well. Probably the biggest downside is that social identities encourage ingroup favoritism, which occurs when we see members of our ingroup as better than other people and people not in our group as all the same. This obviously paves the way for stereotyping.
When do people develop a social identity? Several characteristics make a social identity important to a person:
Similarity suggests that, not surprisingly, people who have the same values or characteristics as other members of their organization have higher levels of group identification.
Distinctiveness suggests that people are more likely to notice identities that show how they are different from other groups. Respondents in one study identified more strongly with those in their work group with whom they shared uncommon or rare demographic characteristics.
Status is important because people use identities to define themselves and increase self-esteem, so it makes sense that they are most interested in linking themselves to high-status groups. Graduates of prestigious universities will go out of their way to emphasize their links to their alma maters and are also more likely to make donations.
Uncertainty reduction is important because membership in a group helps some people understand who they are and how they fit into the world.
The five-stage group-development model seen in Exhibit 9-1 comprises five stages or categories of activity.
First is the forming stage. It is characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose, structure, and leadership. Members try to determine what types of behaviors are acceptable. This stage is complete when members have begun to think of themselves as part of a group.
Second is the storming stage. This is a period of intragroup conflict. Members accept the existence of the group, but there is resistance to constraints on individuality. Conflict arises over who will control the group. When this stage is complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership within the group.
Third is the norming stage. It is one in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates cohesiveness. There is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie. This stage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group has assimilated a common set of expectations of what defines correct member behavior.
Next is the performing stage. The structure at this point is fully functional and accepted. Group energy has moved from getting to know and understanding each other to performing. For permanent work groups, performing is the last stage in their development.
For temporary committees, teams, task forces, and similar groups that have a limited task to perform, there is an adjourning stage. In this stage, the group prepares for its disbandment. Attention is directed toward wrapping up activities. Responses of group members vary in this stage. Some are upbeat, basking in the group’s accomplishments. Others may be depressed over the loss of camaraderie and friendships.
While the five-stage process is generally true, what makes a group effective is more complex. First, groups proceed through the stages of group development at different rates. Those with a strong sense of purpose and strategy rapidly achieve high performance and improve over time, whereas those with less sense of purpose actually see their performance worsen over time. Similarly, groups that begin with a positive social focus appear to achieve the “performing” stage more rapidly. Nor do groups always proceed clearly from one stage to the next. Storming and performing can occur simultaneously, and groups can even regress to previous stages.
Temporary groups with deadlines don’t seem to follow the usual five-stage model. Studies indicate they have their own unique sequencing of actions (or inaction). Their first meeting sets the group’s direction. This first phase of group activity is one of inertia. A transition takes place at the end of this phase, which occurs exactly when the group has used up half its allotted time. A transition initiates major changes. A second phase of inertia follows the transition, and the group’s last meeting is characterized by markedly accelerated activity. this pattern, called the punctuated-equilibrium model, is shown in Exhibit 9-2.
The first meeting sets the group’s direction. A framework of behavioral patterns and assumptions emerges. These lasting patterns can appear as early as the first few seconds of the group’s life. Once set, the group’s direction is solidified and is unlikely to be reexamined throughout the first half of its life. This is a period of inertia—the group tends to stand still or become locked into a fixed course of action even if it gains new insights that challenge initial patterns and assumptions.
Then a transition takes place when the group has used up half its allotted time. The midpoint appears to work like an alarm clock, heightening members’ awareness that their time is limited and that they need to “get moving.” A transition initiates major changes. This ends Phase 1 and is characterized by a concentrated burst of changes, dropping of old patterns, and adoption of new perspectives. The transition sets a revised direction for Phase 2. Phase 2 is a new equilibrium or period of inertia. In this phase, the group executes plans created during the transition period. The group’s last meeting is characterized by markedly accelerated activity.
All group members are actors, each playing a role. We are required to play a number of diverse roles, both on and off our jobs. Many of these roles are compatible; some create conflicts. Different groups impose different role requirements on individuals.
Role perception refers to one’s view of how one is supposed to act in a given situation is a role perception. We get these perceptions from stimuli all around us—friends, books, movies, television. The primary reason that apprenticeship programs exist is to allow beginners to watch an “expert,” so that they can learn to act as they are supposed to.
Role expectations refers to how others believe you should act in a given situation. The psychological contract is an unwritten agreement that exists between employees and their employer. It sets out mutual expectations—what management expects from workers, and vice versa. It defines the behavioral expectations that go with every role. If role expectations as implied are not met, expect negative repercussions from the offended party.
Role conflict refers to situations in which the individual is confronted by divergent role expectations. It exists when compliance with one role requirement may make it more difficult to comply with another. During mergers and acquisitions, employees can be torn between their identities as members of their original organization and of the new parent company.
Stanford University psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his associates simulated a prison environment using two dozen emotionally stable, physically healthy, law-abiding students who scored “normal average” on extensive personality tests, and randomly assigned them the role of either “guard” or “prisoner” and established some basic rules. The simulation actually proved too successful in demonstrating how quickly individuals learn new roles, as the researchers had to end it after only 6 days because of the participants’ pathological reactions.
All groups have norms, or acceptable standards of behavior that are shared by the group’s members. Norms tell members what they ought and ought not to do under certain circumstances.
Performance norms provide explicit cues about how hard members should work, what the level of output should be, how to get the job done, what level of tardiness is appropriate, and the like. These norms are extremely powerful and are capable of significantly modifying a performance prediction based solely on ability and level of personal motivation. Appearance norms include dress codes, unspoken rules about when to look busy and the like. Social arrangement norms focus on whom to eat lunch with or whether to form friendships on and off the job. Resource allocation norms include the assignment of difficult jobs, and the distribution of resources, like pay or equipment.
Full-scale appreciation of the influence of norms on worker behavior did not occur until the early 1930s, following studies undertaken between 1924 and 1932 at the Western Electric Company’s Hawthorne Works in Chicago, discussed in detail in your text.
There 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. The pressure that group exerts for conformity was demonstrated by Solomon Asch.
Groups of seven or eight people were asked to compare two cards held by the experimenter, as shown in Exhibit 9-3. One card had one line; the other had three lines of varying length. Under ordinary conditions, subjects made less than one percent error. The experiment began with several sets of matching exercises. All the subjects gave the right answers. On the third set, however, the first subject gave an obviously wrong answer, the next subject gave the same wrong answer, and so did the others until it got to the unknowing subject.
The results obtained by Asch demonstrated that over many experiments and many trials, subjects conformed in about 37% of the trials; the subjects gave answers that they knew were wrong but that were consistent with the replies of other group members. Has time altered the validity of these findings of nearly 50 years ago, and are they generalizable across cultures? Yes, levels of conformity have steadily declined. Furthermore, Asch’s findings are culture-bound. Conformity to social norms is higher in collectivist cultures than in individualist cultures.
Individuals conform to the important groups to which they belong or hope to belong. However, all groups do not impose equal conformity pressures on their members. Important groups are referred to as reference groups. The 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 like to be a member; and the person feels that the group members are significant to him/her.
Deviant workplace behavior – also known as antisocial behavior or workplace incivility – refers to voluntary behavior that violates significant organizational norms and, in doing so, threatens the well-being of the organization or its members. Exhibit 9-4 shows a typology of deviant workplace behaviors.
When deviant workplace behavior occurs, it can affect employee commitment, cooperation, and motivation. This can lead to performance issues and a lack of job satisfaction. Someone who ordinarily wouldn’t engage in deviant behavior might be more likely to do so when working in a group.
Status is a socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members by others.
Status characteristics theory suggests that differences in status characteristics create status hierarchies within groups. Status is derived from one of three sources. First is the power a person wields over others. Second is a person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals. And third is an individual’s personal characteristics.
Status and norms can influence behavior in organizations. High-status members of groups often are given more freedom to deviate from norms than other group members. High-status people also are better able to resist conformity pressures. This explains why many star athletes, famous actors, top-performing salespeople, and outstanding academics seem oblivious to appearance or social norms.
Status and group interaction is influenced by status. High-status people tend to be assertive. Status differences can inhibit the diversity of ideas and creativity. Moreover, lower-status members tend to be less active.
When status inequity is perceived, it creates disequilibrium that results in corrective behavior. Hierarchical groups can lead to resentment among those at the lower end of the status continuum. Large differences in status within groups is also associated with poorer individual performance, lower health, and higher intentions to leave the group. Managers who occupy central positions in their social networks are typically seen as higher in status by their subordinates, and this position translates into greater influence over the group’s functioning.
Finally, the status of the people with whom you are affiliated can affect how others view you. Studies have shown that people who are stigmatized against can “infect” others with their stigma. This “stigma by association” effect can result in negative opinions and evaluations of the person affiliated with the stigmatized individual.
The size of a group affects the group’s overall behavior, but the effect depends on the dependent variables. Large groups of a dozen or more members are good for gaining diverse input. Smaller groups of about seven members are better at doing something productive with that input.
One of the most important findings about the size of a group concerns social loafing, or the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively than alone.
Groups differ in their cohesiveness, or the degree to which members are attracted to each other and are motivated to stay in the group. Cohesiveness is important because it’s related to the group’s productivity. The relationship of cohesiveness and productivity depends on the performance-related norms established by the group. If performance-related norms are high, a cohesive group will be more productive. If cohesiveness is high and performance norms are low, productivity will be low.
Encourage group cohesiveness by:
Making the group smaller
Encouraging agreement with group goals
Increasing the time members spend together
Increasing the status of the group and the perceived difficulty of attaining membership in the group
Stimulating competition with other groups
Giving rewards to the group rather than to individual members
Physically isolating the group
Diversity in the group’s membership is the degree to which members of the group are similar to, or different from, one another. A great deal of research is being done on how diversity influences group performance. Some studies look at cultural diversity and some at racial, gender, and other differences.
Overall, studies identify both benefits and costs from group diversity. 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. Teams in which members’ values or opinions differ tend to experience more conflict, but leaders who can get the group to focus on the task at hand and encourage group learning are able to reduce these conflicts and enhance discussion of group issues.
It seems diversity can be bad for performance even in creative teams, but appropriate organizational support and leadership might offset these problems. If members can weather their differences over time, diversity may help them be more open-minded and creative and to do better.
Are group decisions better than those made by individuals alone? The strengths of group decision-making include: more complete information and knowledge; increased diversity of views; and increased acceptance of a solution. The weaknesses of group decision-making include: the fact that it’s more time consuming; there are conformity pressures; one or a few members can dominate group discussion; and responsibility can be ambiguous.
Are groups more effective and efficient at making decisions than individuals? The answer depends on how effectiveness is defined.
Group decisions can be more accurate than the decisions of the average individual in the group, but less accurate than the judgments of the most accurate. Individuals are quicker at making decisions, but groups can be more creative and may be better at accepting the final solution.
In summary, groups offer an excellent vehicle for performing many of the steps in the decision making process. They are a source of both breadth and depth of input for information gathering. When 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.
Groupthink is related to norms and affects decision making. It describes situations in which group pressures for conformity deter the group from critically appraising unusual, minority, or unpopular views. Groupthink is a disease that attacks many groups and can dramatically hinder performance.
Groupshift describes the way of discussing a given set of alternatives and arriving at a solution whereby group members tend to exaggerate the initial positions they hold. Groups generally shift toward a more extreme version of the group’s original position.
Most group decision making takes place in interacting groups. In these groups, members meet face-to-face and rely on both verbal and nonverbal interaction to communicate with each other. Interacting groups often censor themselves and pressure individual members toward conformity of opinion.
Brainstorming and the nominal group technique (discussed in the next slide) can reduce problems inherent in the traditional interacting group. Brainstorming is meant to overcome pressures for conformity in the interacting group that dampens the development of creative alternatives. In a typical brainstorming session, a half dozen to a dozen people sit around a table, the group leader states the problem clearly, and members then “free-wheel” as many alternatives as they can in a given length of time. No criticism is allowed, and all the alternatives are recorded for later discussion and analysis. One idea stimulates others, and group members are encouraged to “think the unusual.”
The nominal group technique is different. It restricts discussion or interpersonal communication during the decision-making process. Group members are all physically present, but members operate independently. The chief advantage of the nominal group technique is that it permits the group to meet formally but does not restrict independent thinking, as does the interacting group.
Research shows that the nominal group is generally more effective than the brainstorming group.
Here are the steps in the nominal group technique. First, a problem is presented, and then each member independently writes down his or her ideas on the problem. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to the group. Each member takes his or her turn. The group now discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them. Each group member silently and independently rank-orders the ideas. The idea with the highest aggregate ranking determines the final decision.
Exhibit 9-6 shows that each of the group-decision techniques has its own set of strengths and weaknesses. The choice depends on what criteria you want to emphasize and the cost–benefit trade-off.
We can draw several implications from our discussion of groups. First, norms control behavior by establishing standards of right and wrong. The norms of a given group can help explain members’ behaviors for managers. Second, status inequities create frustration and can adversely influence productivity and willingness to remain with an organization. Third, the impact of size on a group’s performance depends on the type of task. Larger groups are associated with lower satisfaction. Fourth, cohesiveness may influence a group’s level of productivity, depending on the group’s performance-related norms. Fifth, diversity appears to have a mixed impact on group performance, with some studies suggesting that diversity can help performance and others suggesting it can hurt it. Sixth, role conflict is associated with job-induced tension and job dissatisfaction. Lastly, people generally prefer to communicate with others at their own status level or a higher one, rather than with those below them.
Managers should consider that the degree of congruence between the employee’s and the manager’s perception of the employee’s job influences the degree to which the manager will judge that employee effective. Therefore, be certain your employees fully understand their roles so you can accurately assess their performance.
Managers should also be aware that in group situations where the norms support high output, you can expect markedly higher individual performance than when the norms restrict output. Group norms that support antisocial behavior increase the likelihood that individuals will engage in deviant workplace activities.
Managers should pay attention to the organizational status levels of the employee groups they create. Because lower-status people tend to participate less in group discussions, groups with high status differences are likely to inhibit input from lower-status members and reduce their potential.
Finally, when forming employee groups, use larger groups for fact-finding activities and smaller groups for action-taking tasks. When creating larger groups, you should also provide measures of individual performance. To increase employee satisfaction, work on making certain your employees perceive their job roles the same way you perceive their roles.
