Week 8 - Lecture 8 - Leadership and group processes Flashcards
approaches to studying leadership
trait
behavioural
situational
transformational
What does the trait approach say about leadership?
Stable personality characteristics that predispose a person to become a leader;
Generally, a person who is a good leader in one situation would make a good leader in any situation;
examples of traits of leaders
‒ Intelligence
‒ Assertiveness
‒ Independence
‒ Self-confidence
Weaknesses of trait approach to leadership
- Little support for trait theory:
‒ Very limited evidence that personality traits alone determine good leaders;
‒ Although some traits might be useful to have, they are not essential for a successful leader; - No “specific” personality traits that make all leaders successful.
what does the behavioural approach to personality focus on?
behaviours and actions of great leaders
what does behavioural approach say about leadership?
Anyone can become a leader, simply by learning the behaviours of effective leaders.
according to behavioural approach what must a person learn to be a good leader?
behaviours related to:
‒ Consideration – Building trust and rapport, showing concern
for group members, maintaining two-way communication;
‒ Initiating Structure – Planning, assigning roles, motivating
group members;
leaders are born not made refers to which approach?
trait
leaders are made not born refers to which approach?
Behavioural
limitations to trait and behavioural approaches
- Trait & behavioural approaches emphasise personal factors at the expense of situational characteristics;
- These approaches are limited as:
1) No one set of personality characteristics can ensure successful leadership.
2) Certain leadership styles fit certain situations.
3) Leaders can adapt their styles to the demands of the situation (task- or person-orientated leadership).
what does the situational approach to leadership say?
- Depends more on the characteristics of the situation than on the traits and behaviours of the leaders (Perrow, 1970);
- Differences between leaders are negated by situational demands (Vroom & Jago, 2007);
looks at certain behaviours and characteristics in specific situations
Briefly explain Blanchard (1993) model of situational leadership
graph with directive behaviour along the bottom (low-high) and supportive behaviour on side (low-high)
high directive and low supportive behaviour - directing
high directive and high supportive behaviour - coaching
high supportive and low directive behaviour - supporting
low supportive and low directive behaviour - delegating
who proposed a spectrum of leadership behaviours?
Bass and Riggio (2006)
leadership spectrum proposed by Bass and Riggio (2006)
Laisse-faire, transactional leadership, transformational leadership
laissez-faire style
lack of leadership
transactional leadership
- contingent reward
- active management by exception
- passive management by exception
transformational leadership
- idealised influence
- inspirational motivation
- intellectual stimulation
- individualised consideration
what is a group?
two or more people who cooperate with each other and are co- dependent in a sense that they influence each other because of their goals and needs;
group properties according to Johnson and Johnson, 1987
- A collection of individuals who are interacting with one another.
- A social unit of 2 or more individuals who perceive themselves as
belonging to a group. - A collection of individuals who are interdependent.
- A collection of individuals who join together to achieve a goal.
- A collection of individuals who are trying to satisfy a need through
their joint association. - A collection of individuals whose interactions are structured by a set
of roles and norms. - A collection of individuals who influence each other.
what is social identity?
defining the self in terms of group memberships, for example one’s ethnicity (Hogg & Vaughan, 2017; p. 132).
what is social categorisation?
the process of classifying people as members of different social groups.
what is group polarisation?
group produced enhancement of members’ pre-existing tendencies; a strengthening of the members’ average tendency, not a split within the group.
examples of group polarisation
– French students’ attitude towards their president (pos.) and towards
Americans (neg.) was enhanced by a group discussion (Moscovici & Zavalloni, 1969);
– Isozaki (1984) found that Japanese students, after discussing a traffic case, gave more pronounced “guilty” judgements;
– Canadian business students reinvested more money when they made a decision in groups than individually (Whyte, 1993) [72% vs 94%];
- Republican-appointed judges tend to vote like Republicans and the tendency is strengthen when among like-minded judges (the same for Democrats; Schkade & Sustain, 2003);
- Gang delinquency stems from mutual reinforcement within neighbourhood gangs (shared attributes and hostilities; Cartwright, 1975);
- Terrorism doesn’t appear suddenly, rather, it grows slowly among like-minded people (e.g. shared grievance) (McCauley, 2002);
what is groupthink?
“The mode of thinking that persons engage in when concurrence-seeking becomes so dominant in a cohesive in-group that it tends to override realistic appraisal of alternative course of action” (Janis, 1971).
tendency to think like others when we are in a group situation
when is groupthink a good thing?
In work: groups, sense of camaraderie and team spirit can positively affect productivity (e.g. effort, time) and it’s good for morale;
when can groupthink cause problems?
However, when making decisions, group-thinking process can cause problems;
groupthink symptoms
– An illusion of invulnerability;
– Unquestioned belief in the group’s morality;
– Rationalisation;
– Stereotyped view of opponent;
– Conformity pressure;
– Self-censorship;
– Illusion of unanimity;
how to prevent groupthink
- Being impartial – not endorsing any position; (sit back at first)
- Encouraging critical evaluation; (play devil’s advocate)
- Occasionally divide the group into sub-groups; (come up with solution to same problem but separately)
- Welcoming critiques from outside experts;
what is social loafing?
“Many hands make diminished responsibility” – groups members may be less motivated and may put less effort in the task when they perform as a part of a group;
example of social loafing
Latane et al. (1979) and Harkins et al. (1980) noticed that the noise produced by a single participant alone was louder than when there were six people shouting or clapping;
in terms of social loafing, does collective effort always lead to slacking off?
– No – people in groups loaf less when the task is:
challenging, appealing, and involving;
– No - people in groups loaf less when the other members are their friends or when they strongly identify with their group.
what is team cohesion?
“A dynamic process which is reflected in the tendency for a group to stick together and remain united in the pursuit of its instrumental objectives and/or for the satisfaction of member affective needs”
Carron, Brawley & Widmeyer (1998, p. 213)
who came up with the conceptual model of team cohesion?
Carrol et al., 1985
A conceptual model of Team Cohesion (Carron et al., 1985)
team cohesion at top branches into group integration and individual attraction
group interaction splits into task orientation and social orientation
individual attraction splits into task orientation and social orientation
2 main dimensions of team cohesion
group integration (GI)
individual attraction to the group (ATG)
group integration
how close or united the group is
individual attraction to the group
personal motivation to join/remain in a group
key characteristics of team cohesion (Carron et al., 1998)
- multidimensional
- dynamic (not a stable quality - it changes)
- instrumental (directed by groups purpose)
- affective (feels good to belong)
what comes into cohesion? other factors?
- Environmental ➢ Size of the team; level of competition;
- Personal ➢ Satisfaction; adherence behaviour;
- Leadership ➢ Behaviours;
- Group/team ➢Roles; norms; goals.
what is team building?
- Team building = method of assisting a team to promote an increased sense of unity and cohesiveness and enable the team to function more smoothly and effectively (Newman, 1984);
- The process of attempting to enhance a team’s locomotion as well as its maintenance (Widmeyer & DuCharme, 1997);
(maintenance in terms of staying together) - Involves intellectual, physical, and emotional problem-solving tasks and challenges, while emphasizing elements of fun, cooperation, communication, and adventure (Midura & Glover, 2005).
what did Brawley and Paskevich (1997) add to the idea of team building?
– (1) satisfy the needs of team members;
– (2) increase team effectiveness;
– (3) improve working conditions;
– (4) enhance team cohesion.
Principles of team building (Carron
et al., 1997)
- Each player should be acquainted with the responsibilities of other team members.
- The coach should learn something personal about each team member, and use it
to gain cooperation. - Involve players in decision making to make them feel that the team belongs to
them. - Set the team goals and celebrate when they are attained.
- Prevent the formation of cliques within the team, by giving every member
opportunities to perform and avoiding scapegoating. - Use routines in practice designed to teach team members how dependent they
are on each other. - Highlight the positive aspects of play, even when the team is on a losing streak.
Personal-Disclosure Mutual Sharing
(PDMS)
- Publicly disclosing personal stories and information that were previously unknown to other members of the team can foster a greater appreciation of team members:
– values, beliefs, attitudes, and personal motives; - To create shared perceptions among team members →shared understanding;
what can Personal-Disclosure Mutual Sharing (PDMS) lead to?
- PDMS session can lead to enhanced communication and cohesion, greater decision-making efficiency, and to increased motivation (Orlick, 1990; Yukelson, 2006; Cannon-Bowers & Salas, 2001).
Holt and Dunn (2006) proposed model of the processes and benefits of a PDMS intervention
perception of meeting at the top branching into enhanced understanding, cohesion and confidence
