groups and teams Flashcards
Schein’s (1980) definition of a group
A group is a number of people who
interact with each other;
are psychologically aware of each other;
perceive themselves to be a group.
Brill’s (1976) Definition of ‘a team’
A team is a group of people, each of whom possesses particular expertise; each of whom is responsible for making individual decisions; who together hold a common purpose; who meet together to communicate, collaborate and consolidate knowledge, from which plans are made, actions determined and future decisions influenced.
Stages of team development
(Tuckman 1965, Tuckman and Jensen, 1977
- Orientation: Why am I here?
- Trust Building: Who are you
- Goal/Role Clarification: What are we doing?
- Commitment: How?
- Implementation: Who does What, When, Where
- High Performance: How?
- Renewal: Why continue ?
first 4 are creating stages where theyre forming between stage 1 and 2 and storming in stage three the last 3 are sustaining stages where between 4 and 5 theyre norming and betwen 6 and 7 are performing
characteristics of forming
Individualistic
People withhold full participation
Trust: wait and see
Management give no real authority to act
Mission is understood, but does not motivate
Communication from leader to members, rather than members to members, little listening
characteristics of storming
Honeymoon is over, energy dissipating
Stress over roles, over uneven contribution
Trust: working out who to trust
Purpose: slowly becoming clear
Communication: often aggressive
Team processes start to be worked on
characteristics of norming
Informal experts emerge; team over-rely on them
Swear allegiance to team / team pride; rivalry with other teams
Reluctant to challenge others
Trust: developing, but not tested
Clear focus on performance and goals
Communication to each other as well as to leader
Team processes well underway
characteristics of performing
Team is pro-active; sets most of its own priorities
Team seek wider business info & involvement
Strong culture of “high accountability”
Team share leadership: all involved
Team priorities what is good for the business as a whole
Trust high: climate of support and challenge
Team manages its performance as a team.
Application of Tuckmans theory
promote effectiveness of work groups
starting point for team development practitioners
understanding team processes across different organisations
Critical evaluation of Tuckman’s Stages of Team Development Theory
Limitations of model: no representative sample of settings where small group development processes are likely to occur.
Lack of quantitative research / The model was based on a literature review and observation of a limited number of small group settings
Recent theories recognize the complexity of group dynamics in today’s world and are not easily represented in a simple model
Belbin (1981) team roles
they are 9 roles in a team that belbin belived where needed for an efficient team, they are split into three broad groups: people orientated, cerebral and action
Are about behavioural preferences, not a personality profile
Most individuals are capable of playing more than one role
You don’t ‘give’ people a Belbin role
bellmans people oriented roles are..
coordinator
team worker
resource investigator
what does the coordinator role do?
can be mature, confident and clarifies goals, promotes decision making and a good delegator, identify talents
allowable weaknesses: however can often be seen as manipulative and offload work to others
what does the team-worker role do?
they are very cooperative and diplomatic, they listen and build with the team
allowable weaknesses: however can be indecisive in crunch situations when decisions must be made
what does the resource investigator do?
they are enthusiastic and communicative, outgoing and confident, they explore opportunities and develop contacts
allowable weaknesses: however they may be over optimistic of the outcome of the tasks and lose interest as they lose initial enthusiasm
what are bellmans cerebral (thinking) roles?
plant
monitor evaluator
specialist
what does the plant role do?
they are the problem solver who are creative and imaginative. they are often unorthodox but solve difficult problems
allowable weaknesses: however they may be forgetful and absent minding as they may ignore incidentals (small problems), they are also too occupied to communicate well
what is the monitor evaluator role?
they are strategic and discerning, they offer a logical eye and look at things objectively, they are unemotional and see all options and judge accurately
allowable weaknesses: however lack the drive and ability to inspire others
what is the specialist role?
they are single minded (focus on one thing) and self starting as well as dedicated to their task due to knowledge and skills in rare supply in their area
allowable weaknesses: however may contribute on a narrow front and dwell on technicalities
what is the action/task roles?
shaper
implementer
completer/finisher
what is the shaper role?
they thrive under pressure and are dynamic and challenge others and like to be challenged they have the courage o overcome obstacles
allowable weaknesses: however they are prone provocation and may offend peoples feelings
what is the implementer role?
they are disciplined and reliable as well as conservative and efficient, they turn ideas into practical actions, they ensure plans get carried out
allowable weaknesses: however slow to respond to new possibilities and somewhat inflexible
what is the completer/ finisher role?
they are painstaking concientious and anxious, they search for errors and deliver on time they are pulled in towards the end of the task and make sure the work is completed to the highest order
allowable weaknesses: however they are inclined to worry and reluctant to delegate
What is a team role?
“A tendency to behave, contribute and interrelate with others in a particular way.“ (Belbin, 1981)
Application of belbins team theory
Should NOT be used for recruitment and selection
Only as a tool for awareness of own strengths and abilities, and understanding own role within a team helps to deal better with the demands of the team environment
It IS possible for someone with a Belbin team role preference of (for example) Resource Investigator to be the chair – they will just do it differently
what would you need if there was Underachievement in the team?
a shaper
what would you need if there was Late projects
in the team?
team needs a completer/finisher
what would you need if there was Conflict in the team?
more teamworkers or a strong coordinator
what would you need if there was Satisficing in the team?
resource investiagtor, plant or monitor evaluator
what would you need if there was Mistakes prone
in the team?
a monitor evaluator
According to Belbin, each member performs two roles being…
A functional role (professional knowledge)
A team role (pattern of team interaction)
The team needs an optimal balance in both functional & team roles. That balance is dependent on the goals & tasks that the team faces.
The effectiveness of the team will be promoted by the extent to which members correctly recognise and adjust themselves to the relative strengths of the team, both in expertise and ability to engage in specific team roles
Critical evaluation of Belbin’s team roles
Discriminant validity i.e. overlap between the roles (but good according to van Dierendock & Groen, 2008)
Reductionist – we are more than team roles
The interaction between situation and team task requirements needs to be better understood: Which roles required for which task in which situation?
Behaviour can change depending on the situation i.e. people have agency (it’s interesting to note that teams with ‘intelligent’ members tend to perform better – maybe because they are adapting their behaviour to the situation)
4 Factors affecting group cohesiveness and performance
Membership: size of the group, compatibility of members, permanence
Organisation: leadership, HR policies and procedures, success, threat
Work environment: nature of the task, physical setting, communications, technology
Group development: forming, storming, norming, performing
Pros of Decision Making in Teams
More information from different sources
Mutually acceptable solution
Credibility / legitimacy of solution
Commitment towards implementation
Cons of Decision Making in Teams
Pressures to conform
Groupthink
Extreme-decisions: e.g. polarised
Takes more time
Lines of responsibility can become unclear
Social loafing
what is groupthink?
“…is the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses dissent and appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups.” (Janis, 1982)
Occurs when:
“…powerful members of the group…coerce less powerful group members to go along with a decision in public even though they may disagree in private.” (Dyer, 1998)
what study does group think link to?
Conformity Experiments(Asch, 1951) which shows that if a group thinks something then its likely your opinion or answer will change in order to conform with the majority or a group leader
Symptoms of Groupthink
- Illusion of invulnerability
- Collective rationalization
- belief in inherent morality
- Stereotyped views of out-groups
- Direct pressure on dissenters
- Self-censorship
- Illusion of unanimity
- Self-appointed mind-guards
what are some suggestions to minimising groupthink (janis 1972)
Impartial leader
Critical evaluators
Devil’s advocate
Subgroup for policy evaluation
‘Second chance’ meeting
Group norm – disagreement does not mean disrespect
Climate of constructive controversy e.g. get someone to support a minority viewpoint
how does groupthink like to group cohesiveness
High group cohesiveness is associated with more symptoms of groupthink than low group cohesiveness (Park, 2000)
what is group polarisation?
“Groups tend to make more extreme decisions than we might expect, given the initial preferences of group members”
(Bettenhausen, 1991)
why does group polarisation occur?
social comparison (we like to present ourselves in a socially desirable way)
persuasive argumentation (information consistent with the views held by the majority will dominate the group discussion)
(Isenberg, 1986)
