Class 3 Flashcards
Hidden profile Problem
- hidden profiles will only emerge when all information is fully shared
- teams tend to focus on shared information; instead they should try to draw out each member’s unique information
- a superior decision alternative is hidden because each member only has a portion of the information that supports the alternative
- murder mystery
Shared vs Unshared Information
- 3 person teams of physicians
- Hypotheitical medical case. Te two most likely causes were lyme disease or infectious mononucleosis
- 25 y old frail with full symptoms and over last 2 months, swollen joints, skin rash, muscle soreness, unexplained weight loss. Three months before; enlarged liver and protein in urine
- 2/3 of information in video was the same across the three people
- Results
- Shared information discussed early and more
- the more unshared information discussed -> increased accuracy of diagnosis
- Leaders played an active role in whether unshared information was discussed
Why Don’t Members Share?
- Pressures toward conformity
- they fear exclusion from the group and they re uncertain about the norms and expectations of others
- they become uncertain about their own perceptions and judgements
- the organization or team culture insist the expression of conflict among members
Where’s the information?
- There are cases where the person who has the knowledge can be sitting right next to you and it goes unnoticed and you plow a lot of ground that you didn’t necessarily have to. Theres still a lot of duplication of effort. There just isn’t any way that I know of how to really make that happen so that all knowledge that has ever been done on something is available to the person at the time in which they need it. Its all a matter of getting the right knowledge into the right hands at the right time
-Boeing exec - If only HP knew what HP knew
-HP exec - in general, teams that share more information outperform teams that share less information.
Conformity and uniformity
- the most common fear about groups is too much conflict
- a bigger risk, however, is too much agreement
- Groups must be confronted with what it privately believes and not just what it publicly agrees upon
- By conforming or remaining passive, you may be complicit in unethical behavior
How to get unique information -Ineffective Strategies
- increase amount of discussion
- increase size of group
- increase amount of information
- make team accountable for decision
- provide incentives
- give team more time
How to get unique information -Effective Strategies
- set up the right process and structure
- redirect discussion to unshared information
- determine team members’ knowledge and expetise
- suspend initial judgement
- create psychological safety
- encourage full discussion of minority opinions
- cultivate norms that require disagreement
- establish a pattern of identifying and questioning the underlying assumptions
Bay of Pigs vs Cuban Missile Crisis
Leader Role
President Kennedy present at all critical meetings
Kennedy deliberately absent from preliminary meetings to create “Second Chance Meeting”
Devils Advocates
No individual designated to occupy the special role of Devil’s Advocate
Two confidantes of the President playing the role of “intellectual watchdog” – probing for the flaws in every argument
Group Norms – Rules of engagement
Adherence to rules of protocol and deference to status
Minimization of status/rank differences Freedom from rules of protocol
Cohesion and Diverse Perspectives
Extreme secrecy – very small group kept “in the know”
Exclusion of lower level aides and outsiders with fresh points of view
Direct communication between Kennedy and lower level officials with relevant knowledge and expertise
Periodic involvement of outside experts and fresh voices
Use of Constructive Conflict and no Independent Evaluation
One small subgroup, driving the process “The same men, in short, both planned the operation and judged its chances of success.”
Two subgroups of equal size, power, and expertise Repeated exchange of position papers and vigorous critique and debate
Separated evaluation of an option from its creation
Consideration of Alternatives – Disconfirming evidence
Rapid convergence upon a single alternative
No competing plans presented to the President
Balanced consideration of multiple alternatives Arguments for various options presented to the President
Typles of conflict
- Task conflict: disagreements about the task (ideas, plans, work to be done) -> positive outcomes when little relationship conflict and high psychological safety
- Process conflict: disagreements about how to approach the task (who does what) -> generally negative outcomes (though need to negotiate process in beginning)
- Relationship conflict: disagreements based on personal and social issues that re not related to the task (tension, annoyance, frustration, irritation) -> negative outcomes
Types of diversity
- informational diversity (differences in members’ knowledge bases)
- social category diversity (demographic differences - age, race, gender, etc.)
- Value diversity (differences in beliefs about the group’s philosophies and values)
Functional vs Dysfuncial conflict
- promote functional/constructive conflict
* minimize dysfunctional conflict
Dealing with dysfunctional conflict
- recognize that dysfunctional conflict may occur
- set up a structure and process to minimize dysfunctional conflict and process to minimize dysfunctional conflict AND that allows for functional conflict
- must have psychological safety
- have a common goal
- build team identity
- build trust
- team contract
- allow for discussion of conflict (but controlled venting)
Managing Interpresonal Conflict
- talk with other group members to confirm your perceptions
- assess whether the issue is important
- make a list of specific behaviors you have observed as being disruptive
- have some tentative suggestions in mind
- be prepared to listen carefully to other persons view
- be prepared to use supportive communication behaviors
- select the right communication channel
- stay in the present tense and negotiate for future changes
- personalize the confrontation
Improving team interactions
- set up the right process
- minimize process losses (effort and motivation, ability and coordination) - classes 1,2,3
- incorporate leadership and ensure psychological safety - class 2
- encourage functional conflict (sharing unique information, devils advocate) class 3
- manage/minimize dysfunctional conflict (clarify norms & expectations; build trust; establish common goal; foster accountability - team contract). 2 and 3
Clarify expectations and set norms early
- set up norms of debate and disagreement
- assign roles
- encourage participation from al members
- express your true opinions and don’t just express what you think others are thinking and feeling
- identify and question assumptions
- find out what each member knows
- set up norms on how you will interact
- suspend initial judgment
- make member contributions identifiable and provide feedback
- establish climate of psychological safety
- build trust among members
- communicate effectively
- practice as a team
Key take-aways
- sharing information is key to team performance
- teams need to foster functional conflict while minimizing dysfunction conflict
- certain types of diversity can improve functional conflict
- having a good PROCES in place is critical
- remember to have psychological safety
