Groups and Teams

Question 1

Group v team

Answer 1

all teams are groups, but not vice versa

Question 2

When has a group matured into a team?

Answer 2

• Performance is greater than the sum of its parts (i.e., individuals)
• Goal is collective performance (not just information-sharing)
• Accountability is mutual as well as individual
• More “groupiness” – more interaction, goal commitment, sense of cohesiveness

Question 3

What do behavior roles in groups look like?

Answer 3

We generally act in ways that are consistent with our role in a group
Project supervisor
Scrub nurse (vs. surgeon, anesthesiologist, etc.)

… even if role assignment is arbitrary or not very meaningful

Question 4

What are implications for organizations of roles in groups

Answer 4

We generally act in ways that are consistent with our roles in the group
Is this good or bad for organizations?

Advantages: People generally step up to their roles
“Leader”
“Expert”

Disadvantage: Some roles constrain performance
“New guy”
“American”
“Intern”

Question 5

Group norm advantages

Answer 5

Advantages
Check on problematic or non-productive behavior
Slackers may step up
Helps fight procrastination

Disadvantages
Herd or mob behavior: others’ info is not always correct
Rate-busters may dial back
Whistle-blowers are relatively rare

Question 6

Positive effects of group accountability

Answer 6

Working in a strong, cohesive team increases individual performance
Employees value team relationships
-> Increased group and organizational commitment

Question 7

Cons of group accountability

Answer 7

Deindividuation / workplace deviance

Social loafing

Question 8

What is deindividuation?

Answer 8

• People are more violent, anti-social when part of a group (especially larger groups)
• People are more likely to cheat if cheating will only be noticed at the group level

Question 9

What is social loafing?

Answer 9

Social loafing: People may show less individual effort when they believe only group efforts are being measured

When individual efforts are not noticeable, it’s tempting to become a free rider
Group productivity is then less than the sum of individuals’ productivity

Especially likely:

In individualistic cultural contexts
When people don’t feel a strong team loyalty
When groups are large

Question 10

Pros of decision making in groups

Answer 10

-More complete information
Can capitalize on diversity of strengths and skills
-More solution acceptance
-Generally more accurate than the average of individuals working separately
Why?
Ex: evaluating past performance of potential investment opportunities
Discussing together > having everyone evaluate separately and vote
Discussion allows otherwise-private information to be shared and considered

Question 11

Cons of decision making in groups

Answer 11

Slower
If speed & efficiency are crucial, groups are not the way to go

Many > 1 only if diverse perspectives are actually shared

Common-knowledge effect – people may over-assume that others know what they know (instead of sharing it)

Large status differences can inhibit other voices, lead to “groupthink”

Question 12

What is groupthink?

Answer 12

“Many heads, one mind”
Motive for solidarity outweighs motive for realistic evaluation of the facts

Can occur when group:

• Is highly cohesive
• Is insulated from outside world, any contrary opinions
• Has a strong leader with clear wishes
• Feels under stress

Result:

• Group ignores full range of alternatives
• Doesn’t develop contingency plans
• Doesn’t consider risks
• Leader’s opinion rules

Question 13

How to avoid groupthink?

Answer 13

Leader should avoid expressing opinion right away

Let voices be heard

• Include diverse members
• Invite outside opinions
• Appoint a devil’s advocate
• Use private ballots

If there are known status differences in group:
-Consider subgroup meetings or individual analysis prior to group discussion

Question 14

Why does the common knowledge effect occur?

Answer 14

Reason #1 – Commitment and consistency, anchoring

Reason #2 – Social comparisons

Question 15

Why does commitment and consistency matter to the common knowledge effect?

Answer 15

Group discussion anchors on initially stated preferences

People tend to defend their publicly stated positions

Question 16

Why do social comparisons matter to the common knowledge effect?

Answer 16

People look to others to evaluate the relative importance of information

Shared information is evaluated as more important, relevant, and accurate than unshared information
But it may not be – is everyone’s information coming from the same source?
And even if different sources: more true ≠ more important for current decision

Shared information elicits encouragement and validation from others
Which encourages its repetition

Social costs of revealing unique info: group members seen as more competent when they communicate shared vs. unshared info

Question 17

How can the common knowledge effect be avoided?

Answer 17

Get information on the table before people vote or commit to a preference

Frame the task as problem solving rather than a judgment or personal preference
Problem-solving orientation yields greater information sharing

Cultivate a norm of constructive disagreement
Pre-discussion disagreement increases likelihood of unique information being shared
Even one dissenter can help …

If you are the leader:
Be aware of the tendency to spend too much time validating each others’ viewpoints
Take responsibility for setting norms where divergent opinions are welcomed