GROUP DYNAMICS AND PROCESSES

Group Dynamics and Processes

Group Dynamics and Processes

Introduction

Use of work teams; groups of employees with interdependent interaction and mutually shared responsibility, has increased dramatically during the past decade (Gibson 2003: 444) Fong (1999) attributes the driving force behind this trend to increased competitiveness across industries, particularly those involved in global business. The new organisational culture requires managers to develop new skills in order to lead, direct and motivate groups to act synergistically (Barsade 2002). However, group dynamics is a concept that many managers have not yet understood. Consequently this can lead to bad group dynamics resulting in negative synergy, reduced productivity and wounded morale (Levi 2001). Managers are obliged to rectify this by building cohesion and trust between group members (Carron & Brawley 2000). Why are some group efforts more successful than others? Robbins & Millet (2001) states group members, group size, level of conflict and internal pressures to conform are all factors to consider.

Analysis

In order to enhance their competitive position and to benefit from different viewpoints, organizations today increasingly rely on cross-functional teams composed of members from different functional backgrounds. However, cross-functional teams often do not yield anticipated performance gains. (Randel, E. 2003: 763)Paulus & Larey (1995) have performed studies supporting the statement by Randel. Employees of a corporation who had participated in training for effective teamwork were asked to brainstorm about a job-relevant issue in groups of four or alone. Participants rated their performance higher in groups than alone, yet the groups brainstormed only half the ideas of the individuals combined. This negative synergy is precisely what organisations need to prevent. If teams are formed to increase competitiveness but the result is a fifty-percent decrease in productivity, a serious problem arises. How can managers solve this dilemma?

Indeed, there is evidence that the mere fact of increasing worker autonomy and participation may be one of the more subtle disorders of group processes because of the increase in the tension between natural social impulses and those of individuality. Furthermore, there is evidence that when this tension is exacerbated by pressures to increase production beyond the normally expected production level, the tension is resolved in favor of individually oriented behavior. (Klein 1995: 34)The statement put forward by Klein indicates that within a group, social tension is amplified by the expectation to increase productivity. The consequence is that employees do not participate in the group. A middle level manager of a company that had begun to implement total quality management (TQM) had this to say, "The year end push for production is causing chaos. Everyone is busting their butts to meet their targets and the quality teams are caught up in it. People are beginning to point fingers and the team concept that we worked so hard to get seems to be breaking down. (Klein 1995: 34)

The pressure leads each group member to remain an individual unit rather than interacting with other members of the team. Levi (2001: 362) states that managers must understand and promote good interpersonal ...