Chapter 7: Group Dynamics Flashcards
define group dynamics
the vitality and changing nature of groups, a feild of study that focuses on the behavious of groups
sports teams provide an ideal setting for reasurch on group dynamics beacuse (4)
- it’s natural (not in a lab)
- can consist of many confounding variables (size, rules of conduct)
- ideal for studying: cooperation, competion, conflict
- statisitcs- many objects to measure group effectiveness (ie. batting average)
define a team
- collection of two or more indivduals
- common identity
- common goals and objective
- structured patterns of interaction and models of communication
- common perceptions about group structure
define a sports team
- are independant (personal or task)
- interpersonal attraction
- consider themselves a group
how does a group become a team? (4 stages)
- forming
- storming
- norming
- performing
aspects of forming (3)
- belong to the team
- develope interpersonal relationships
- determine roles (formal and informal)
storming (3)
- resistance to control
- rebel against the leader
- stress and tension
norming (4)
- solidarity and cooperation
- group cohesion (team unity)
- combined effort toward a common task (win/ productivity)
- includes behaviour, belief, performace
performing (4)
- well defined roles
- stable relationships
- importance of everyones contribution
- primary goal is team success
define team climate
how indivuals percieve their interrelationships
social support
emotional, performace feedback, role claifaction, empathy, listen to others
proximity
close to each other physically, where the group meets before practice, athlete dorms, locker room
distinctiveness
own identity, uniforms, motos, banners, cheers
fairness
equal treatment by coaches, compatibity
simularity
commitment, attitudes, goals, expectation
task independance
all grouyp memebers benifit (or suffer), team mates are responsible for each other
factors of group climate (9)
- social support
- proximity
- distinctiveness
- fairness
- compatibilty
- help to improve ability
- simularity
- communication
- task indepance
group efffectiveness model
actual productivity = potential productivity - process losses
group effectiveness conceptual framework (inputs)
- member attributes
2. group enviroment
group effectiveness conceptual framework (throughputs)
- group structure
- group cohesion
- group process
group effectiveness conceptual framework (outputs)
- group products
2. individual products
memeber attibutes
- physical
- psycological
- varibility
- comparibility
group enviroment
- task
- size
group size
- # on the team
- who dresses
- # in action
- # in social unit (manager, medical, alumini, parents)
ideal size for optimal productivity, moral cohesion, satifaction or other outcomes
group processes- decrease linearly
potential productivity- increase exponentialy then platues
actual productity- parabola below the lines of potential productivty and group processses
optimal group size?
the peak of actual productity, too many people and the potential platues
as size increases it becomes more difficult to interact, communicate and plan
group structure (4)
- postion
- structure
- roles
- norms
defince rolse
a set of behaviours that each indivual in the group is require to perform
formal roles
determined by the nature and structure of the organization
informal roles
evolve from interacting amoung group memebers
group effectiveness can be improved by (2)
- role clarity
2. role acceptance
define norms
standard of belief about what is appropraite or inappropriate behaviour for group members
norms have a powerful effect on behaviour and it is therefore important for the leader (with input) to establish postive norms
norms for productivity (3)
- puntuality
- attendance
- preparedness
group products
stability, performance
indvidual products
adhereance, satisfaction
decline in indiviual productivity
-lack of coordination and loss of motivation (social loafing)
define social loafing
a reduction in indivual effort (motivation) when people work collectively vs. alone
when social loafing is the greatest (8)
- individuals cannot be evaluated
- task is low on meaningfulness
- individual involvment on the task is low
- no comparison against group standard
- others in the group are expected to perform well
- indiviual contibuting the group is a stanger
- personal contribution is considered redundant
- competion against percieved weaker apponent
why social loafing occurs (4)
- allocation stratrgy- save the best for solidarity work
- minimizing strategy- little effort as possible (little personal accountibilty)
- free rider effect- reduce effort “free-rider” is not essential to outcome
- slacker effect- reduce effort, dont want to give a “free ride” to a less productive memeber
