Understanding Group Dynamics: Questions, Essay Example

Why is it important to understand group dynamics in the business world? How does positive interdependence help to achieve mutual goals? Why is it said that research about groups is NOT always valid and relevant?

Group dynamics define how a group of people acting in the same environment interact and influence each other in their jobs as well as manner in which their interaction influences their performance on the job. The business environment is influenced by interdependence between individuals. Building strong group synergy and interdependence helps increase the work morale as well as the motivation towards timely completion of tasks. Groups are formed for various reasons. The ability of tapping into the group set up and influencing the group to move towards attainment of common goals defines the group’s positive interdependence. This implies that for a group that is used to working together, the outcome of assignments that are allocated to such groups is determined by their ability to function as a unit. However, the group needs to overcome philosophical discontinuity which serves to hinder these very important facets of business management.

Philosophical distance is viewed as the difference of opinion as well as varying view point and approaches to a problem (Blair 2008). This implies that these differences offer fertile ground for ideas it also provide an ideal platform to subject the ideas to constructive criticism Studies on groups are not always viewed as being relevant due to the many factors that come into focus while analysing group behaviour. First are the consideration of the working environment and the operation circumstances of the group in question. Different groups are bound to have different backgrounds and their work environments vary. This implies that the research carried out on a group in a different environment is not likely to always hold true for a group in a different environment. This being the case, the research does not always hold true. On the other hand, research on groups always assumes that the individual traits of the people involved are held constant. Group research therefore tends to ignore the fact that the traits of these people vary from group to group.

Are groups OR individuals more effective in work environments?

Groups are more effective in the work environment than individuals due to various reasons. First group models depict a movement of ideas and actions that help ease the member’s anxieties and emotions which eventually help increase efficiency (Bion 1961).  This means that individuals settle into new roles faster if they are working in groups and this therefore helps ease the process of settling in. Group activities are viewed as a chemical reaction where the reagents constantly interact with each other to reach a threshold where the reaction can take place. Similarly, the group is normally a place of continued interaction which enables the members of the group to easily discharge their responsibilities as well as exchange ideas. This means that the continued interaction between members of a group ensures that they continuously exchange information which makes it easier for them to work as well as keep learning from each other and therefore improving.

What is group cohesiveness? Is group cohesiveness important? How do group cohesive forces affect group processes? What can you do to increase cohesiveness in your group?

Group cohesiveness is used to refer to the manner in which a group acts in tandem as a directed unit with synergy and whose ideas serve them as a unit not as a bunch of people. The coherence of ideas and the uniformity of the stance that a group takes in decision making helps define their cohesiveness.

According to Chapman (2008), brainstorming is an effective way of increasing decision making. This ensures that all aspects are looked at and examined with the due attention to detail. This gives one an opportunity to understand the weaknesses in their plan. Equally important is the use of strengths weakness opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis to determine the efficacy of the decision so taken in meeting the challenges. Group cohesiveness can therefore be improved by using proper analysis before a decision is arrived at. By carrying out such analysis one is able to make an all inclusive decision that ensures that the problem of philosophical discontinuity is completely eliminated. Such other business analysis models like potters five forces model and the value chain analysis should be used in arriving at an appropriate decision that can be easily acceptable to the other members of an organization. The other way of ensuring that decisions are made with satisfaction of all parties involved is by using delegation as a good method of achieving consensus. Some of these decisions are delegated to the people with dissenting views hence helping them get close to and thereby eliminate the distance. Besides effective communication being used t enhances group cohesiveness, team building activities are also used to ensure that the group members interact in a semiformal setup. This ensures that the various members of a group feel close to each other and therefore can understand and even anticipate the thinking of the other group members.

In all successful organizations, effective communication is a mandatory requirement for smooth running. This is more especially in groups since they have a propensity towards being timeless, as well as borderless organizations. The fabric that holds these organizations and the heartbeat that sets rhythm for their operations is communication. The current economic situations as well as the changes in management styles demand for a change of approach in management styles.  The only way to ensure high performance and sustain it is through a change in the management style and this can be achieved through the bosses turning to servants or what is called is called servant leadership (Greenleaf R, & Spears L, 2002.)

How does social influence/interaction affect decision-making? How can you encourage/promote and discourage member’s acceptance of proposals in the workplace?

Social interaction between groups acts as a breeding ground for the brainstorming for ideas at the work place. Communication can serve as a very effective tool for dealing philosophical discontinuity. Most important is the process of 360 degrees feedback as a tool of communication in passing forth information in an organization. This method ensures that information flows up and down the hierarchical ladder of the groups. Holding regular meetings with personnel of all cadres helps in ensuring that all information is passed ford between the different levels of management as well as the implementing arm (McNamara 2008). This ensures that there is no feeling of exclusion among any members of the group and therefore forestalling the possibility that a wide philosophical gap will develop between the members. For groups at the workplace to they can serve as either encouragement towards acceptance of proposals or discouragement against the same. There are the people who wield a lot of influence in a group. Once these reject a proposal, it becomes automatic that the other members in an effort to feel to belong to the group will join the move to feel to belong. On the other hand the contentious decisions can be delegated to the members of the group who hold dissenting views about the proposals. Since these feel like a vital part of the group and they do not want to collide with the other members of the group. The other way to encourage member’s acceptance of proposals in a group is through the involvement in the development of the project. This is possible through the use of strategic development sessions. This ensures that every participant is given an opportunity to voice their ideas as well as their criticism on the plans of others. The resultant culture of consultation heightens respect and openness between the different members of the business management. In this way, the differences of opinion are clearly understood and effectively addressed with ease. This ensures that these differences serve as strengths to the organization as opposed to them being the impediment to the development of the organization.

Are leaders an important aspect of groups? Can leaders emerge from groups? How? What is the importance of group members’ perceptions about leadership and why is this phenomenon important as it pertains to group outcomes?

Leaders are an important function in groups. This is because of various reasons. Most important is the fact that the groups need a pivot from which their influence stems. This implies that the group functions need to be controlled from a central point. For this to happen leaders are necessary in a group failure to which the group would be functioning as an amorphous unit of individuals with no purpose or focus. The leadership not only helps set direction but also determines the degree of cohesion that is attained, so the ability of the leadership to create an all inclusive and all embracing group. The groups perceptions in as far as leadership is concerned is important because of setting direction for the group. If the leadership is perceived as being fair, then the group is likely to heed to the advice and direction set by the leadership. This means that the group is likely to have more loyalty and motivation to follow a leader who they perceive as being fair and therefore follow him with more dedication. The group is more likely to achieve their performance targets and also deliver on their expectations if they have a good perception of the leadership.

Why are teams more effective than work groups in certain situations? Identify these situations where teams are more.

Teams are more effective than groups because teams are built more around functionality and individual skills as opposed to groups which are built on the need to belong. Teams go through the several stages of tem development as stated by Tuckman and these are storming, forming as well as adjournment. Teams are also driven by core values that determine the manner in which they relate to each other. This is to mean that most of the teams are goal focused and are not formed out of the need to belong or feel part of a wide group of people. The pressure to belong therefore means members are not able make independent and unbiased decisions. Teams on the other hand are built on individuals with varied competencies as well as mandates. This means that members of the team have a reason to stick to the work plan and ensure that they achieve the targets. Similarly groups are built around semiformal or utterly informal setups which hinder the performance and focus of the group. Teams on the other hand are normally formal hence it becomes easier to drive the team agenda in such circumstances. Due to these reasons therefore, in situations where the work being one and the agendas being addressed is formal, teams are preferred to groups.

References

Bion, W.R. (1961) Experiences in Groups. London: Tavistock Publications.

Blair, G. M. Conversation as communication. Retrieved November 7, 2008 at: http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~gerard/Management/art7.html.

Chapman, A. (nd). Problem-solving & decision-making. BusinessBalls.com. Retrieved November 7, 2008 at: http://www.businessballs.com/problemsolving.htm.

Greenleaf, R.  & Spears, L. (2002). Servant Leadership: a journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. New York: Paulist Press.

McNamara, C. (nd). Basics in internal organizational communications. Retrieved November 7, 2008 at: http://www.managementhelp.org/mrktng/org_cmm.htm