Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 1 Chapter 7 Groups and Teams

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 2 Groups l Groups are two or more people interacting with each other to accomplish certain goals l Groups form because of mutual attraction or because managers assign people to groups (within an organization) l Group size (usually between 2 and 20) influences communication and group dynamics (more then 2 people offers complexer interaction, e.g. coalitions)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 3 Group Size and Task Interdependence l Group size is affected by the kind of task interdependence the group is to perform –Pooled task interdependence l Overall group performance is sum of performances of individual group members (group of sales people in a department store) l Group size determined from the amount of work to be accomplished l Group members can be rewarded on individual performance

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 4 –Sequential task interdependence l Group members have to perform specific tasks in a predetermined order (assembly lines, mass production processes) l Group size is dictated by needs of the production process (e.g. no. of steps necessary to produce a CD player) l Group members are to be rewarded on group performance (Individual performance difficult to identify because it‘s dependence on other‘s performance [slow worker at start of assembly line causes all others further down to work slowly]) Group Size and Task Interdependence

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 5 –Reciprocal task interdependence l Each group members performance is dependent on other group members work (sharing of information, interacting with others necessary to achieve goals [R &D teams, self managed work teams]) l Relatively small size because of necessity to coordinate team members‘ acitivities (e.g. communication difficulties increase with group size) l Group members are usually to be rewarded on group performance (as far as individual performance is difficult to be measured) Group Size and Task Interdependence

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 6 l Groups have common goals and usually specific time frame (two week project) and limited resources (budget) l Many groups are ineffective due to time constraints, resource scarcity or underdeveloped social skills l Teams (as a type of group) achieve goals by using self-management techniques l National and corporate cultures affect groups and teams (e.g. group structure and processes) Groups

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 7 l Group structure is composed of rules, norms, roles and status (useful elements to understand groups in all cultures) l Examples: –all groups develop/ maintain social norms –Most groups differentiate member status (few members occupy high-status positions) Group Structure

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke Elements of Group Structure l Rules –Specify formal behavior –Can sanction disobedience l Norms –Are usually informal and unstated (taken for granted by group members) –Are often more effective to regulate group behavior (groups generate ist own norms e.g. punctuality, making formal rules appear irrelevant)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 9 Elements of Group Structure l Roles –Set of norms, defining expected behavior (in a position within the group) l Status and Social Power –Every role has a status (rank of the role in group hierarchy) –Status is connected to social power (ability to have others follow one‘s own opinions/ directives) –High status position combined with an approved role behavior establishes power (at least one form of) –Group members often occupy multiple roles (causing role conflicts, e.g. manager as friend/ colleague and supervisor)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 10 l Leaders and Followers –Two types of leaders: task leaders and socio-emotional leaders l Task leaders (initiating leaders) focus on goal achievement (clarify goal, present or ask for information, evaluate group‘s progress) l Socio-emotional leaders focus on constructing/ maintaining group cohesion (encourage/ praise others, resolve conflicts) Elements of Group Structure

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 11 –Two leader roles are complimentary in effective groups („balance“ most effective way to manage a group) l Without task leader group risks to evolve into a social club (focus on group‘s sentiments and interpersonal relationship) l Overemphasizing task leadership (e.g. leader makes decisions without participation of others) people might get demotivated (lose their sense of purpose) –Emphasis on leadership type varies with culture (e.g. autocratic leadership vs. group leaders as facilitators) Elements of Group Structure

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 12 l Leaders and Followers –Followers differ among cultures in subordinate participation and leader support –Low power distance countries are least supportive on following group leader –Task and socio-emotional leader roles can shift in group (e.g. depending on one‘s expertise or the type of support) –Again: culture influences leadership shift ( e.g. less in autocratic leadership cultures vs. democratic leadership cultures) Elements of Group Structure

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 13 l Formal and informal groups –Formal groups in companies are assigned to accomplish specific goals (management appointing a leader, mandatory membership, rule governed behavior) –Formal groups reflect the idea: pooling resources is superior to individual effort –Informal groups evolve naturally (based on friendship, common interests, similar experiences), even within formal groups Elements of Group Structure

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 14 –Can contribute or undermine achievement of official goals (e.g. protect member interests against management demands) –In any case exert significant social power (e.g. as supporting group members as „voting block“) –Culture contributes to using either formal or informal groups (high power vs. low power countries) Elements of Group Structure

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke Group Development l The Five-Stage Model –Forming: members get to know each other (e.g. personal characteristics, strength/ weaknesses) and reach common goals. –Storming: members potentially disagree on goals, priorities and (leadership) roles to take (Managers need to be sure conflict stays focused) –Norming: close ties and consensus (by a set of rules and roles) begin to develop between members to coordinate group‘s activities and goal achievement –Performing: group understands ist goals/ roles and does its real work –Adjourning: group is disbanded (after work is done) or tries to postpone disbandment (delaying decisions etc.)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 16 Orientation to Task Testing of roles Intragroup Conflict Emotional Response to the Demands of the Task Emotional Response to the Demands of the Task Open Exchange of Relevant Information Emergence of a Solution Development of Group Cohesion Functional Roles Emerge Dissolution of Group STAGE 1 Forming (Orientation) STAGE 5 Adjourning (Termination) STAGE 2 Storming (Redefinition) STAGE 3 Norming (Coordination) STAGE 4 Performing (Formalization) Five Stages of Group Development

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 17 l Model no rigid process –Groups move back/ forth among stages as a result of conflicts –Unexpected events (e.g. new members of crisis) can return group to earlier stage Group Development

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 18 l The Punctuated Equilibrium Model –Two different modes of group functioning 1. A first meeting to set group climate and leadership is followed by a period of routine group functioning (equilibrium stage) 2. At midpoint of allotted time equilibrium is disrupted by recognition that task must be completed („revolutionary“ stage with orientation toward project completion) –Fits our image ot people working toward a deadline (start less intensely, work harder when approaching dealine) Group Development

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 19 PROJECT STARTS TRANSITION PROJECT DEADLINE Perform Original Behaviors Drop Old Behaviors Perform New, More Effective Behaviors 0%50%100% TIME EXPENDED Group Development (Punctuated Equilibrium Model)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 20 l Cultural influences on group development –Level of participation (less follower participation in high power than low power cultures) –Level of conflict and cooperation (more collaboration in collective oriented than individual oriented cultures) –Level of time pressure (cultures less concerned with time might not set deadlines, could eliminate „midpoint change“) Group Development

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 21 Group Processes l Behavior in groups is affected by a variety of social processes –Communication is central to groups (to achieve their goals) –Communication is affected by culture (e.g. group norms: who is how much permitted to talk, who can interrupt a conversation) l Informal communication structure (low power- distance) vs. formal communication structure (hígh power-distance) l Rule guided communication in HC-cultures (affects group interaction)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 22 –Groups may have a common cultural identity with shared symbols, rituals and values (e.g. subgroups with ethnic/ religious background or common occupational experiences) –Strong group culture l Can produce a highly cohesive group that works well together (to achieve company goals) l Can result in conflict among groups over organizational resources ( personnel, technology, finances, prestige) l Some conflict is „healthy“ for an organization (source of innovation) Group Processes

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 23 l Decision Making: Group decisions could be useful from a –Technical perspective (groups pool skills, talents, experiences of many people) –Organizational perspective (higher motivation, better decision implementation) l Group decisions are to find in cultures with individualistic/ democratic values (e.g. German co-determination with worker reps. hold decision making roles on corporate boards) Group Processes

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 24 l “Groupthink”: highly cohesive groups can be unable to critically evaluate each other inputs in decision making (prevalent primarily in Asia) l Social Loafing in groups –Self interested individuals put forth less effort in a group than individually Group Processes

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 25 Making individual contributionsidentifiable contributionsidentifiable Emphasizing valuable individual individualcontributions Emphasizing valuable individual individualcontributions Keeping group size at an appropriate level Keeping group size at an appropriate level REDUCED BY SocialLoafingSocialLoafing Group Processes l Reducing social loafing

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 26 Symptoms of Groupthink Invulnerability Rationalization Morality Stereotyping Pressure Self-censorship Unanimity “Mindguarding” Members feel they are safe and protected from dangers, ostracism, or ineffective action. Members ignore warnings by rationalizing their own or others’ behavior. Members believe their actions are inherently moral and ethical. Members view opponents as truly evil or stupid and thus unworthy of or incompetent at negotiations around differences in beliefs or positions. Members pressure all individuals in the group to conform to the group’s decision; they allow no questioning or arguing of alternatives. Members do not question the group’s decision. Members perceive that everyone in the group has the same view. Members may keep adverse information from other members that might ruin their perceptions of consensus and the effective decision. Symptom Description

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 27 Team l Teams are groups, whose members intensively collaborate (not just interact) to achieve a specific common goal (e.g. a project) l All teams are groups, not all groups are teams

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 28 How Teams Differ from Groups l Shared Leadership roles (groups usually have one strong focused leader) l Individual and mutual accountability (groups are based mostly on individual accountability) l Specific purpose (group‘s purpose usually identical to organization‘s mission) l Collective work products (groups have individual work products)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 29 l More open-ended communication/ active problem solving meetings l Performance measured by direct assessment of collective work products (not individual contribution to group) l Team‘s work style: discuss, decide and delegate but do work together (groups discuss, decide and delegate but do work individually) How Teams Differ from Groups

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 30 Types of Groups/ Teams l Groups/ Teams can be distinguished according to the applied perspective –Internal organization of groups l Traditionally managed groups (have an official leader/ manager) l Self-managed teams (share responsibility for managing the work group) –Time frame for group work l Relatively permanent groups (work for longer periods [more than a year] on a set of repetitive tasks) l Temporary groups (project work on new, innovative issues [task forces])

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 31 –Number of different disciplines l Single discipline groups (members from one department [quality circle]) l Multiple discipline groups (members from different departments [cross-functional work groups}) –Cultural diversity l Homogeneous groups (members have same background) l Bi- or multicultural groups (members have two or more ethnic backgrounds) Types of Groups/ Teams

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 32 l Permits Increased Creativity –Wide range of perspectives –More or better ideas –Less „group think “ l Creativity can lead to –Better problem definition –More alternatives –Better solutions –Better decisions l Groups can become –More effective –More productive l Causes lack of cohesion –Mistrust –Stereotyping –More within-culture conversation –Language problems l Lack of cohesion can lead to –Inability to validate ideas –Inability to gain consensus of decisions –Inability to take concerted action l Groups can become –Less effective –Less efficient Advantages Disadvantages Advantages and Disadvantages of Cultural Group Diversity

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke Convergence or Divergence? l Trend toward using group-oriented management techniques in individualistic societies l Introduction of market-based principles in collective societies leading to more individualism l Continuing tensions among cultures l Multiculturalism threatens dominant groups l Some societies remain homogeneous

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke Implications for Managers l Managing diverse groups –Give organizational objectives precedence over multicultural considerations (avoid replacing religion or ethnic identity with traits, skills, talents etc.) –Emphasize clear vision/ superordinate goal (to prevent multiple goals with competing subgroups) –Create equal power among group members (more power to one subgroup through cultural dominance can lead to nonparticipation by others and destructive conflict)

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke 35 –Avoid ethnocentrism (viewing one‘s own culture as superior to other cultures) –Recognize the limits one‘s own culture imposes for understanding the nature of groups in other cultures Implications for Managers

Copyright 1998 Prentice-Hall Inc., adapted by Prof. Dr. vom Kolke Implications for Managers (cont.) l New uses of groups and teams –Groups and teams may replace traditional organizational structures –Use of teams may increase in cross- cultural negotiations