De fundamenten van groepsgedrag Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Leerdoelen Onderscheid te maken tussen formele en informele groepen Uit te leggen waarom mensen zich bij een groep aansluiten Te beschrijven hoe rollen wisselen afhankelijk van de situatie Aan te geven waarom het Hawthorne-onderzoek belangrijk was Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Leerdoelen Aan te geven waarom het onderzoek van Asch belangrijk was De gevolgen van lijntrekken op te noemen De voor- en nadelen van hechte groepen te beschrijven Het effect van pluriformiteit op de groepsprestaties te verklaren De verschillen en overeenkomsten tussen groepthink en groupshift te noemen Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Groepen definiëren en classificeren Bevelgroepen Formeel Taakgroepen A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who come together to achieve particular objectives. Groups can be either formal or informal. The command group is dictated by the organizational chart. It is composed of subordinates who report directly to a manger. Task groups, also organizationally determined, represent persons working together to complete a job. A task group’s boundaries are not limited to a given manager. Instead, task groups can cross command relationships. It should be noted that all command groups are task groups, but since task groups can cut across the organization, the reverse need not be true. People who may or may not be aligned in a common task or command group may affiliate to obtain common objectives. These interest groups could band together to support a peer who has been laid off or to schedule their vacations. Groups often develop because individual members have one or more common characteristics. These friendship groups can be based on support for a sports team or similar political views. Belangengroepen Informeel Vriendengroepen Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Redenen waarom mensen zich aansluiten bij een groep Status Zekerheid Macht Doelen bereiken Eigenwaarde Affiliatie Security. By joining groups, people can reduce the insecurity of “standing alone.” Status. Inclusion in a group that is viewed as important by others provides status and recognition for its members. Self-esteem. Groups can provide people with feelings of self-worth. Affiliation. Groups can fulfill social needs. Power. What cannot be achieved individually often becomes possible through group action. Goal achievement. Sometimes, it takes more than one person to accomplish a task. In such cases, management will use formal groups. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Onderzoeken naar groepsnormen fysieke omgeving De Hawthorne- onderzoeken druk The Hawthorne studies were conducted at Western Electric’s Hawthorne Works in Chicago between 1924 and 1932. Researchers began by reviewing the relation between the physical environment and productivity. They began with illumination experiments with a number of workers but found that the intensity of illumination was only a minor influence on productivity. Another study was introduced to determine the effect of a sophisticated wage incentive plan. The most important finding was that workers did not individually maximize output. Rather output was controlled by group norms that determined what was a proper day’s work. If group members violated these norms, they were corrected or punished. The Hawthorne studies revealed that groups exert pressure to bring the behavior of members into conformity with the group’s standards. Solomon Asch made up groups of seven or eight people who sat in a classroom and were asked to compare two cards held by the experimenter. One card had one line; the other had three lines, one of which was identical the the line on the other card. The object was to say out loud which of the three lines matched the single line. Because the answer was so obvious, errors were made less than one percent of the time. But Asch wanted to know whether group pressures to conform would pressure an unsuspecting subject (USS) into altering his answers to align with the answers of the other members of the group. Asch found that in about 35 percent of the trials, the USS gave answers that he or she knew were wrong but were consistent with the responses of the other group members. Asch’s classic study demonstrated that people desire to be one of the group and to avoid being different, so they feel pressure to conform. conformeren Asch-onderzoeken groepsinvloed Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Verband tussen groepscohesie en productiviteit Hoog Laag Sterke toename productiviteit Matige toename productiviteit Hoog groepsdoelen en organisatiedoelen Overeenstemming tussen Geen significant effect op productiviteit Groups differ in cohesiveness: the degree to which members are motivated to stay in the group. Studies show that the relationship of cohesiveness to productivity depends on the performance-related norms established by the group. The more cohesive the group, the more members will follow its goals. The figure above summarizes the relationship between group cohesiveness, performance norms, and productivity. Managers can use the following techniques to encourage group cohesiveness: 1. Make the group smaller. 2. Encourage agreement with group goals. 3. Increase the time team members spend together. 4. Increase the perceived status of the group and of attaining membership. 5. Stimulate competition with other groups. 6. Give rewards to the group rather than to members. 7. Physically isolate the group. Daling productiviteit Laag Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Omvang Elementaire Groeps- concepten Samenstelling Status Large groups with a dozen or more members are good for gaining diverse input. Groups of about seven members are more effective for taking action. Social loafing is the tendency for individuals to expend less energy when working collectively than working individually. It challenges some stereotypes: that team spirit engenders individual effort and enhances productivity, and that group productivity should at least equal the sum of the productivity of the individual group members. However, research by Ringlemann and others indicates that increases in group size are inversely related to individual performance. For example, while total productivity in a group of four is greater than in a group of two, individual productivity declines. Therefore, managers who use collective work situations to enhance morale and promote teamwork must also identify individual efforts. Heterogeneous groups usually perform better than homogenous ones. However, cultural or national diversity can interfere with group processes, in the short run. While cultural diversity can be an asset on tasks that require a variety of viewpoints, such groups can have difficulty learning to work together. Status can have major behavioral consequences when individuals do not receive the respect from others that they believe they deserve. Status may be formally imposed through titles, such as “the Chief Executive Officer,” or amenities, such as the trappings of high organizational status. It may also be informally acquired through age, education, skill, or experience. Group members must believe that the status hierarchy is equitable; otherwise, the perceived inequity will cause various corrective behaviors. For example, people believe that rewards should be proportionate to the costs incurred. Employees expect that what an individual has and receives will be congruent with his or her status. Because groups generally agree within on status criteria, group rankings of individuals usually concur. But, differing inter-group status criteria can cause conflict if heterogeneous or cross-functional groups must be interdependent. Status Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Individuele besluitvorming versus Besluitvorming in groepen snelheid duidelijke verantwoording consistente waarden betere informatie en kennis verschillende invalshoeken acceptatie van oplossingen A major advantage of individual decision making is speed. An individual does not have to convene a meeting and spend time discussing various alternatives. Individual decisions also have clear accountability. The person who made the decision is known; therefore, responsibility for the outcome of the decision is easy to fix. Individual decisions also ten to convey consistent values. While individuals are not perfectly consistent when making decisions, they are more so than groups. Groups generate more complete information and knowledge. By aggregating the resources of several individuals, groups bring more input to the decision- making process. Groups also offer increased diversity of views. Evidence indicates that a group will almost always outperform even the best individual. So groups generate higher quality decisions. Finally, groups lead to increased acceptance of solutions. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

Besluitvorming in groepen Groupthink Groupshift A product of group pressures, groupthink is a deterioration of an individual’s mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgement. This phenomenon occurs when group members want so badly to concur that the norm for consensus overrides realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action and the expression of minority or unpopular views. Groupthink can be characterized in four ways: (1) Group members rationalize resistance to their assumptions. (2) Members pressure doubters to support the alternative favored by the majority. (3) Doubters keep silent and minimize to themselves the importance of their ideas. (4) The group interprets silence as consent. Groupthink can lead to decision-making deficiencies: incomplete problem assessment, poor information search, selective bias in processing information, limited development and incomplete assessment of alternatives, failure to evaluate the risks of the favored choice, and failure to reevaluate initially rejected alternatives. Five factors can foster groupthink: the group’s cohesiveness, the leader’s behavior, insulation from outsiders, time pressures, and failure to follow methodical decision-making procedures. In a special kind of groupthink, the decision of the group reflects the dominant decision-making norm that develops during the group’s discussion. When groupshift occurs, group decisions exaggerate the initial positions of individual members, the shift usually will be toward greater risk, and the direction of shift is dependent of members’ prediscussion inclinations. Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7

besluitvorming in groepen Interacteren Brainstormen Technieken voor besluitvorming in groepen The most common form of group decision making takes place in face-to-face interacting groups. But interacting groups often censor themselves, thereby pressuring individual members toward conformity of opinion. Brainstorming, the nominal group technique, and electronic meetings can reduce many of the problems inherent in traditional group interaction. By using an idea generating process that encourages any alternatives and criticizes none, brainstorming can overcome pressures for conformity in the interacting group. It does this by using an idea-generation process that encourages any and all alternatives, and withholds any criticism of them. The nominal group technique restricts discussion during the decision-making process. Group members are all present, as in a traditional meeting, but they operate independently. This decision-making technique permits the group to meet formally but does not restrict independent thinking. A recent approach that blends the nominal group technique with computer technology, electronic meetings promote honesty, anonymity, and speed. If we ignore the additional costs of hardware and software, electronic meetings have proven more effective than other methods for generating unique alternatives. Nominale groepstechniek Elektronisch vergaderen Pearson Education, 2002 Hoofdstuk 7