GROUP AND INTER GROUP PROCESS: GROUP INFORMATION AND GROUP PROCESSES

Dishant Jojit JamesPALB 5138

Jnr MSc (Agri)Dept. of Agricultural Extension

UAS (B)

GROUP• A group is a unit of two or more people inreciprocal communication and interactionwith each other.

• Group formation promotes discipline, loyalty,group responsibility and group pressureamong employees.

• Group member’s roles include knowledgecontributor, process observer, peoplesupporter, challenger, listener, mediator,gatekeeper and take-charge leader.

• Definition: According to Bogardus

• “As a collection of people, two or more, whohave common objects of attention, who arestimulating to one another and who havecommon loyalty who participate in similaractivities.”

• Webster’s Dictionary defines a group as “anumber of persons near, placed, or classifiedtogether.”

GROUP INFORMATION

1. FORMAL GROUP: Is one deliberately formed by theorganization to accomplish specific tasks and achieve goals.

• Examples of formal or work groups include departments,projects, task force, committees and search teams to find anew executive.

2. INFORMAL GROUP: Is one which emerges over timethrough the interaction of workers. Although the goals ofthese groups are not explicitly stated, informal groupstypically satisfy a social or recreational purpose.

• Members of department who dine together occasionallywould constitute an informal group.

INTERGROUP PROCESS

• Intergroup relation between two or more groupsand their respective members is often necessaryto complete the work required to operate abusiness. Many times, groups inter-relate toaccomplish the organization’s goals andobjectives.

Definition

• According to Thomas(1976) Intergroup behaviour,or the way groups interact with other groups, isbest examined in terms of the frequency andinteraction type the groups engaged in.

Intergroup process in HRD

1.Horizontal strain: Involves competitionbetween functions

Example: sales versus production

2. Vertical strain: Involves competition betweenhierarchical levels

Example : union versus management,

foreman versus middleman.

Improving the quality of intergroup relations in an organization

• Superordinate goals

• Negotiation

• Intergroup team development

• Reducing the need for intergroup conflicts

• Resource allocation process should be fair.

GROUP PROCESS

Group process refers to how an organization's members work together to get things done. Group process refers to what happens within groups including communication, decision making, leadership, motivation and cohesiveness, norms, roles, power and control dynamics, synergy, social loafing or free riding, social facilitation effect etc.

• Group Cohesiveness:Group cohesiveness refers to extent to which members of thegroup are attracted towards each other demonstratedthrough unity in the group, conformity to the norms of thegroup and willingness to continue in the group.• Synergy:The concept of synergy has been derived from biology thatrefers to an interaction of two or more substances thatgenerates an outcome which is different from the individualaddition of the substances.• Social loafing or free riding:Tendency of individuals to reduce their effort or contributionin the group situation.• Social facilitation effect:Phenomenon in which individual's performance improves ordeteriorates in presence of others.

• Group process can occur from within the group, outside of the group and anytime of year.

• Effective organizations take a close look at how members work together, which roles they fill and whether members are contributing equally.

• Through group process, observation and analysis can help identify problems early, thus alleviating the need for a major overhaul as the year progresses.

Questions to ask yourself as you begin observing a group.

• Communication:

• Who talks? For how long? How often?

• At whom do people look when they speak?

• Who talks after whom? Who interrupts whom?

• What style of communication is used (assertions, questions, tone of voice, gestures, etc.)?

• Who sits where? Do the same people always sit in the same place?

• Participation•Who are the high participants? Who are the low

participants?

•Do you see any shift in participation (e.g., highs

become quiet; lows suddenly become talkative)?

What are possible reasons for this in the group's

interaction?

•How are the silent people treated? How is their

silence interpreted?

•Who talks to whom?

•Who keeps the ball rolling?

• Decision Making

• Does anyone make a decision and carry it out without checking with other group members (self-authorized)?

• Does the group drift from topic to topic? Who topic-jumps? Who supports other members' suggestions or decisions? Does this support result in the two members deciding the topic or activity for the group? How does this affect the other group members?

• Is there any attempt to get all members participating in a decision (consensus)? What effect does this seem to have on the group?

• Does the executive board make all of the decisions or do the members?

Importance of Developing an Effective Team

• It may seem unrealistic to view a planning bodyas a team, but certain committees or task forceswill need to operate as a team to complete suchtasks as needs assessment, developing thecomprehensive plan, development of acontinuum of care, or setting up qualityimprovement procedures.

• Developing an effective team from a diversegroup of planning body members requires anunderstanding of group process.

Models of Group Development

• One way of understanding group process is through looking atmodels of group development.

• The most common model is Tuckman’s (1965)model. It’s afive-stage model of group development that can lead toformation of “high-performance teams”.

• It breaks development into the following five stages:

Stage 1: Forming

In the forming stage, a group attempts to define the task and

decide how it will be accomplished.

Members may feel excitement, anticipation, and optimism

or suspicion, fear, and anxiety about the work ahead.

The group also attempts to determine acceptable group

behavior and how to deal with group problems, and begins

to develop group identity.

Stage 2: Storming

In this stage, members may resist the tasks at hand or may resist

approaches different from those each individual is comfortable

using.

Common group behavior during this stage includes establishment

of unrealistic goals, concern about excessive work, defensiveness

and competition among the members—who may argue even when

they agree on the real issues—and questioning of suggested

approaches.

Some groups fail to get beyond this stage, and remain in conflict.

Stage 3: Norming

In this stage, groups begin to develop a sense of team closeness,

and are more willing to discuss the team’s dynamics and to

express criticism constructively.

The group attempts to reach harmony or avoid personal conflict

by establishing ground rules.

Group members might begin to feel a sense of relief that things

are going to “work out.”

Planning bodies often use the development or revision of bylaws

and policies as a way to document the norming stage.

Stage 4: Performing

In this stage, group members have a better understanding of each other’s

strengths and weaknesses, and are able to work through group problems.

They often feel close to the team and satisfaction with the team’s progress.

Effective committees, and in some cases whole planning bodies, can become

high-performing teams, in spite of disagreements over priorities and other

decisions.

They have learned to work together effectively and to disagree without losing

mutual respect.

Stage5: AdjourningTuckman(1977) refined the model to include a fifth stage to address how the group begins to disengage and move on to new tasks potentially beyond the team.

• The stages 1 to 5 would not apply for a group that disbanded and never worked together.

Another model for looking at the development of effective work groups isthe “Cog’s Ladder” Model, which identifies additional stages of group

development

The politeness stage

• Members are getting acquainted with each other, sharing only some

information and being careful in their interactions.

The “why are we here” stage

• The group begins to clarify purpose, share values, and form cliques or

subgroups.

The bid for power stage

• There is competition among some members for control of the group.

The constructive stage

• collaboration and consensus building occurs among members; shared

leadership, and a group identity develops.

The “esprit” stage

• group interaction reflects creativity, trust, caring, openness, respect, and

acceptance.

Case study on Group process and organizational performance

“Relation of employee attitudes on job-relatedmatters to feeling that group discussions withsupervisor are worthwhile”

Reference: From Rensis Likert, New Patterns inManagement(New York: McGraw-Hill PublishingCo., ) pp. 26-43

The frequency of work-group meeting, as well as theattitude and behavior of the superior toward theideas of subordinates, affects the extent to whichemployees feel that the superior is good at handlingpeople.

1.Of the workers in work groups where the men feel that thesupervisor likes to get their ideas and tries to do somethingabout the ideas, the percentage who feel the supervisor isgood in dealing with people

when the meeting are held frequently 74%

when the meeting are held occasionally 61%

when the meeting are held seldom 57%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

when the meeting are heldfrequently

when the meeting are heldoccasionally

when the meeting are heldseldom

2.But of the workers in work groups where the menfeel that the supervisor is not interested in their ideas,that it is just talk, and they don’t really get a hearingfor their ideas, the percentage who feel the supervisoris good in dealing with people

• when the meeting are held frequently 25%

• when the meeting are held occasionally 20%

• when the meeting are held seldom 12%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

when the meeting are held frequently

when the meeting are held occasionally

when the meeting are held seldom

3. Of the workers in work groups where no meeting are held

0% 20% 40% 60%

1

no meeting held

no meeting held

39% Feel their supervisor is good in dealing with people

Conclusion of this case study

• From the above findings it is found that of the whoreport that supervisor holds meeting frequently andthat he “ likes to get our ideas and tries to dosomething about them” 74% percent feel that theirsupervisor is good in dealing with people.

• On the other hand, of those who say their boss seldomholds meeting and when he does, “its just talk, wedon’t really get hearing for our ideas,”12% percent feelthat their supervisor is good in dealing with people.

• Of the those who say their supervisor never holdsmeeting, 39 percent feel that he is good in dealing withpeople.

Conclusion

• Group is a collection of people to achieve a common goal. Group

members should be independent in terms of tasks, goals and feedback,

rewards for effective functioning of business organization. Hence, groups

play a major role in sharing common identity, have membership roles and

make decision effectively.

• Intergroup behaviour, or the way groups interact with other groups, is

best examined in terms of the frequency and interaction type the groups

are engaged in. Intergroup behaviour is influenced factors beyond

interaction types. Examples of these include interdependence,

organizational culture, past history, and organizational social networks.

References• Fredric M. Jablin, Linda Putnam (2000). The new

handbook of organizational communication; advances in theory.p.168.

• Nadler L Ed, 1984, the handbook of Human Resource Development, John Wiley and sons, New York.

• Tompkins, Jonathan R, “Organization Theory and Public Management” Thompson Wadsworth (2005)

• Emerging human resource development- S.K Bhatia

• www.hrmstudyguide.com

• www.managementstudyguide.com