L3 - Groups and Teams 2 Flashcards Preview

18BSA505 - Organisational Behaviour > L3 - Groups and Teams 2 > Flashcards

Flashcards in L3 - Groups and Teams 2 Deck (65)
Loading flashcards...

How is Conformity defined?

- Conformity can also be simply defined as “yielding to group pressures” (Crutchfield, 1955).
- Conformity is a type of social influence involving a change in belief or behaviour in order to fit in with a group.


What theories are there about Conformity?

- Conformity Experiments (Asch, 1951)
- Electric shock experiments (Milgram, 1963)


What was the Aim of the Conformity Experiments (Asch, 1951)?

Solomon Asch (1951) conducted an experiment to investigate the extent to which social pressure from a majority group could affect a person to conform.
- This is reference to Compliance conformity (or group acceptance)


What was the Procedure of the Conformity Experiments (Asch, 1951)?

- Asch used a lab experiment to study conformity, whereby 50 male students from Swarthmore College in the USA participated in a ‘vision test.’ Using a line judgment task, Asch put a naive participant in a room with seven confederates.
- The confederates had agreed in advance what their responses would be when presented with the line task. The real participant did not know this and was led to believe that the other seven participants were also real participants like themselves.
- Each person in the room had to state aloud which comparison line (A, B or C) was most like the target line. The answer was always obvious. The real participant sat at the end of the row and gave his or her answer last.
- There were 18 trials in total, and the confederates gave the wrong answer on 12 trails (called the critical trials). Asch was interested to see if the real participant would conform to the majority view. - Asch's experiment also had a control condition --> only real participants


What was the Results of the Conformity Experiments (Asch, 1951)?

- On average about 1/3 of the subject conformed
- Over the 12 critical trails about 75% conformed at least once, 25% of participants never conformed
- In the control group less than 1% gave the wrong answer


What was the Conclusion of the Conformity Experiments (Asch, 1951)?

- Normative Social influence --> They didn’t want to stand out/ wanted to be liked even if they believe the answer was wrong
- Informational Influence --> Belief that others are better informed
- Difficult to maintain that you see something when nobody else does


What was the Evaluation of the Conformity Experiments (Asch, 1951)?

- Biased sample --> All male students belonged to the same age group
- High levels of conformity found by Asch were a reflection of American, 1950’s culture
- In the 1950’s America was very conservative, involved in an anti-communist witch-hunt (which became known as McCarthyism) against anyone who was thought to hold sympathetic left-wing views.
- Perrin and Spencer (1980) --> suggested that the Asch effect was a “child of its time” --> they carried out an exact replication of the original experiments and only found that 1/396 trials did an observer join the erroneous majority
- However, a problem with comparing this study to Asch is the use of science and engineering student who might be expecting to be more independent by training when it came to making perceptual judgements
- Finally, there are ethical issues: participants were not protected from psychological stress which may occur if they disagreed with the majority. Evidence that participants in Asch-type situations are highly emotional was obtained by Back et al. (1963)


What was the Aim of the Electric shock experiments (Milgram, 1963)?

- Milgram (1963) was interested in researching how far people would go in obeying an instruction if it involved harming another person.
- Stanley Milgram was interested in how easily ordinary people could be influenced into committing atrocities, for example, Germans in WWII.


What was the Procedure of the Electric Shock Experiments (Milgram, 1963)?

- At the beginning of the experiment there were introduced to another participant, who was a confederate of the experimenter
- They draw straws to determine their roles and the participant was always the teacher
- There was also an ‘experimenter’ dressed in a grey lab coat played by an actor
- They were split into different rooms the learner strapped to a electric chair and the teacher in another with an electric shock generator
- The learner was given a list of word pairs to learn the teacher tests him by saying word and the learner would have to repeat its paired word
- If they were wrong the teacher gave them an electric shock starting at 15v to 350v (dangerous) --> the learner mainly gave wrong answer
- If the teacher didn’t obey, 4 prods were used by the experimenter --> 1. please continue, 2. requires you to continue, 3. essential for you continue, 4. No choice but to continue


What was the Results of the Electric Shock Experiments (Milgram, 1963)?

- 65% (two-thirds) of participants (i.e., teachers) continued to the highest level of 450 volts. All the participants continued to 300 volts.
- Milgram did more than one experiment – he carried out 18 variations of his study. All he did was alter the situation (IV) to see how this affected obedience (DV).


What was the Conclusion of the Electric Shock Experiments (Milgram, 1963)?

- Ordinary people are likely to follow orders given by an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being. Obedience to authority is ingrained in us all from the way we are brought up.
- People tend to obey orders from other people if they recognize their authority as morally right and/or legally based. This response to legitimate authority is learned in a variety of situations
- Lead to the creation of Milgram’s Agency Theory


What was Milgram’s Agency Theory?

Milgram (1974) explained the behaviour of his participants by suggesting that people have two states of behaviour when they are in a social situation:
- Autonomous State – people direct their own actions, and they take responsibility for the results of those actions.
- The Agentic State – people allow others to direct their actions and then pass off the responsibility for the consequences to the person giving the orders. In other words, they act as agents for another person’s will.

Milgram suggests that two things must be in place for a person to enter the agentic state:
1- The person giving the orders is perceived as being qualified to direct other people’s behaviour --> they seem legitimate
2- The person being ordered about is able to believe that the authority will accept responsibility for what happens


What was the Evaluation of the Electric Shock Experiments (Milgram, 1963)?

- Sample bias --> all male, elected from newspaper advertisement (certain people read newspapers), Only taken from the New Haven area which was seen as being a representation of a typical American town
- Smith & Bond (1998) --> pointed out the majority of studies have been conducted in industrialised Western culture so we should be cautious before we conclude that a universal trait of social behaviour
- Ethical Issues:
- Deception
- Protection of Participants -->exposed to extremely stressful situation that may have the potential to cause psychological harm  there were signs of trembling, sweating, many pleaded to be allowed to stop the experiment (Milgram said that after Debriefing their stress levels decreased)
- People have a Right to Withdrawal but the 4 prods mostly discouraged withdrawals


Why is some conformity good?

- In organisation there needs to be some conformity, so people do work, are more efficient, ease possible social tension between workers, follow proper work rules and procedures


Why can strong teams be a weakness for some organisations?

- It can isolate certain group of people


What are some Problems in Team Decision Making?

- Inadequately considering all alternatives in order to maintain unanimity
- Poor examination of decision objectives
- Failure to properly evaluate the risks of the chosen solution alternative
- Information searches that are insufficient or biased
- Poor communication
- People who haven’t done work are more easily influenced
- Unequal contribution
- Rushing


What is Group Polarisation?

- When a person tends to shift to a more extreme opinion when in a group setting than what his/her original opinion might have been
- Tends to promote the ‘rule of the majority’ leading to disastrous decision making
- Risky Shift --> do something stupid, something you wouldn’t normally do
- Cautious Shift --> group study as an exam deadline is nearing
- This can both occur due to Normative (trying to fit it in) and Information (picking the side who provides more information in its arguments) influences
- A concept linked to negative group polarisation is groupthink


How is Groupthink defined?

- “…is the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses dissent and appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups.” (Janis, 1972)


What is Groupthink (Janis, 1972)?

- Occurs when group member’s motivation for unanimity and agreement (i.e. consensus) overrides their motivation to evaluate carefully the risks and benefits of alternative decisions
- Disagreement is seen as withdrawal of friendship/respect than a useful critical outsight


When does Groupthink occur?

- When “…powerful members of the group…coerce less powerful group members to go along with a decision in public even though they may disagree in private.” (Dyer, 1998)
- Likely to occur in highly cohesive groups where everyone is friendly and respects each other decisions
- On average those with high self esteem had higher levels of groupthink


What are some Positives of Groupthink?

- Cooperation improves
- Harmony exists (no arguing, everyone agrees)
- Less stress – no hurt feelings
- Finish quicker – agree to please everyone


What are some Negatives of Groupthink?

- Low quantity due to rushing
- Wrong decision – agree with each other to please everyone without evaluating alternatives
- Ruin relationships long run --> bad decision --> bad outcome --> blame each other


What are some symptoms of Groupthink?

1. Illusion of invulnerability
2. Collective rationalization
3. Belief in inherent morality
4. Stereotyped views of out-groups
5. Direct pressure on dissenters
6. Self-censorship
7. Illusion of unanimity
8. Self-appointed mind guards


What is Illusion of Invulnerability as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Everything is going to work out alright cause we are the special group
- Take risks
- Ignore danger
- Overly optimistic


What is Collective Rationalisation as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Explain away and discredit warning contrary to group thoughts
- On the East Coast people couldn’t believe that people would vote for Trump during the US election


What is Belief in Inherent Morality as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Don’t take into consideration ethicality/morality as everyone is doing it


What is Stereotyped views of Out-groups as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Anyone with a different opinion is an enemy


What is Direct Pressure on Dissenters as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Don’t argue against dominate view, if something is wrong stay silent


What is Self-Censorship as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Only doubts are never revealed as the climate of the group itself doesn’t allow it


What is Illusion of unanimity as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Everyone holds the same opinion


What is Self-appointed Mind guards as a symptom of Groupthink?

- Member who protect the group form information that contradicts the group’s cohesiveness
- Members cannot for a more rational judgement


What are some Methods for avoiding Groupthink?

- Impartial leader – if leader has opinion should step down and allow someone impartial to step up so they can join in the debate
- Critical evaluators --> looking from the outside to see what is working or not
- Devil’s advocate
- Subgroup for policy evaluation --> gender, age, ethnicity
- Survey ‘outgroups’
- ‘Second chance’ meeting -->if rushed, reconvene and reexamine point of view
- Group norm – disagreement does not mean disrespect
- Climate of constructive controversy e.g. get someone to support a minority viewpoint
- Encourage debate
- Different personalities (creative, thrive under pressure, judge objectively)


What are some Critiques of the Groupthink Model?

- Janis thinks cohesion inhibits open discussion of ideas
- Aldag and Fuller (1993) pointed out research that cohesion promotes it
- Mullin and Cooper (1994) reviewed 66 tests of cohesion and performance and found on average it was a significant aid to performance especially when the group is small


What is Social Loafing theory (Latane et al. 1979)?

- Social loafing (Latane et al. 1979) = Tendency of certain members of a group to get by with less effort than what they would have put when working alone. Its two common manifestations are
- Free-rider effect --> where some members do not put in their share of work under the assumption that others' efforts will cover their shortfall, and thus cause
- Sucker effect --> where the other (fully performing) members lower their efforts in response to the free-riders' attitude. --> people are taking advantage of me so reduce contribution


What causing Social Loafing?

- Lack of Motivation
- Reduced Sense of Responsibility --> When they know that their individual efforts do not have 100% impact on the overall outcome will make them more likely to engage in social loafing
- This diffusion of responsibility is like what influences the Bystander Effect
- Expectations --> if people expect other members to slack off they most likely will do
- Submaximal Goal Setting --> goals and task not well defined
- Attribution and Equity --> people didn’t aren’t working as hard as I am so why should I?


What is the Bystander Effect?

- psychological phenomenon where people are less likely to help someone one in need when there are bunch of other people involved in the scene.
- Bystanders feel they’re not personally responsible and might even feel someone else present can help the person in need.


How can you reduce Social Loafing?

- Group size should be small to begin with.
- Individuals in the group should be assigned tasks and held accountable for their actions as it directly impacts the overall accomplishment of the group.
- Evaluation of group performance as well as the individual performance assures that the individuals put in their maximum effort.
- Also, if the individuals know that the reward achieved isn’t just for the group but also individual members, they will work towards achieving that positive reinforcement.
- If there are clear rules, guidelines, definition of task, and responsibilities, social loafing can be prevented.


How is Team Processes defined?

- Process refers to how the team functions (i.e., how members work to carry out the mission and goals of the team) and whether the team and its members grow, develop, and improve over time. (Nichols et al. 2002)
- The ways team members interact and work with one another for reaching goals are referred to as processes


What are the different types of Processes?

- Transition processes
- Action processes
- Interpersonal processes


What are Transition processes?

This are effective for reflecting on prior accomplishments and preparing for future needs. Examples of transition processes are:
- Identifying/evaluating tasks, challenges, environmental conditions, and resources;
- Specifying and prioritizing goals; and
- Creating action – and contingency – plans.


What are Action Processes?

When teams are working toward the goals and objectives of a project, they perform different activities as part of action processes. These are:
- Gauging progress toward goals;
- Tracking resources and the environment to ensure what is needed will be available;
- Assisting other team members perform their tasks; and
- Coordinating the sequence of member activities


What are Interpersonal Processes?

At all stages of teamwork (e.g., before, during, and after), interpersonal processes are conducted, with a focus on managing the relationships between team members. Interpersonal processes include:
- Conflict management and developing norms that promote cooperation;
- Building and maintaining team member motivation and confidence; and
- Fostering togetherness and coping with stressful demands.


What is Input-Process-Output (IPO) Model of Team Effectiveness (Forsyth, 2010)?

- The input–process–output (IPO) model of teams provides a framework for conceptualizing teams that suggests that many factors influence a team's productivity and cohesiveness.
- “provides a way to understand how team’s performance and how to maximize their performance” (Landy et al. 2009)


What is Input as a factor of the Input-Process-Output (IPO) Model of Team Effectiveness (Forsyth, 2010)?

- Inputs include any precursor factors such as organizational context, task characteristics, and team composition that may influence the team itself, directly or indirectly.
- As written by Forsyth (2010), inputs can include individual-level factors, team-level factors, and environmental-level factors.
- Individual-level factors: team members’ personality traits, strengths, weaknesses, preferences, dislikes
- Team-level factors: the resources the team has access too, how large the team is, how much time the team spends together, how close the team members are
- Environmental factors: how the team works with other teams, whether the team is part of an organization


What are Processes as a factor of the Input-Process-Output (IPO) Model of Team Effectiveness (Forsyth, 2010)?

- Processes are operations and activities that mediate the relationship between the input factors and the team's outcomes.
- Processes include group norms, as well as a group’s decision-making process, level of communication, coordination, and cohesion.
- Specifically, processes can be things such as:
- Steps taken to plan activities
- Initiating actions
- Monitoring resources
- Monitoring progress
- Maintenance of interpersonal relationships
- Dealing with conflict
- Members' sense of commitment to the team


What are Outputs as a factor of the Input-Process-Output (IPO) Model of Team Effectiveness (Forsyth, 2010)?

- Outputs are the consequences of the team's actions or activities. Most often this refers to the team's tangible output – what they made, achieved, or accomplished.
- Whether the team wins or loses, whether their product is of adequate quality, and whether they were successful in completing their goals efficiently are all questions of tangible outcome.
- Other outcomes are also important, such as changes in the team's cohesiveness, the degree to which the team learns to be prepared for future tasks, the uniqueness of the team’s solution, and whether it increases in efficiency through practice.
- Team outputs were also categorized as productivity/performance, member satisfaction, and innovation by Landy & Conte (2009)
- Performance Outcomes --> Extrinsic/Intrinsic Motivation
- Affective reactions (emotions) --> the buzz, it was worthwhile --> Intrinsic Motivation


What are the Evaluation of the Input-Process-Output (IPO) Model of Team Effectiveness (Forsyth, 2010)?

Forsyth (2010) outlined three limitations of the IPO model:
- The IPO model is too simplistic and does not accurately account for all the complex interactions that influence how a team performs.
- Some of the “processes” are not actually processes, but rather characteristics of a team that develop and emerge as the team works together. They are not events that happen, but merely mediators of the input-output relationship.
- The IPO model should consider that teamwork influences constitute a feedback loop in which reversal causal sequences are also possible.
- These feedback loops are used to analyse performance which could change inputs or ‘emergent cognitive’ --> people’s state of mind


What is Adair’s Three Circle model (1997)?

- Adair’s simple Action-Centred Leadership model that provides a blueprint for leadership and the management of any team, group or organisation
- Contains three overlapping circles of Task, Team and Individuals
- Effective leaders pay attention to three areas of needs for member of the team


What is Task as a factor of Adair’s Three Circle model (1997)?

Achieving the Task:
- identify aims and vision for the group, purpose, and direction - define the activity (the task)
- identify resources, people, processes, systems and tools (inc. financials, communications, IT)
- create the plan to achieve the task - deliverables, measures, timescales, strategy and tactics
- establish responsibilities, objectives, accountabilities and measures, by agreement and delegation
- set standards, quality, time and reporting parameters
- control and maintain activities against parameters
- monitor and maintain overall performance against plan
- report on progress towards the group's aim
- review, re-assess, adjust plan, methods and targets as necessary


What is Team as a factor of Adair’s Three Circle Model (1997)?

- establish, agree and communicate standards of performance and behaviour
- establish style, culture, approach of the group - soft skill elements
- monitor and maintain discipline, ethics, integrity and focus on objectives
- anticipate and resolve group conflict, struggles or disagreements
- assess and change as necessary the balance and composition of the group
- develop team-working, cooperation, morale and team-spirit
- develop the collective maturity and capability of the group - progressively increase group freedom and authority
- encourage the team towards objectives and aims - motivate the group and provide a collective sense of purpose
- identify, develop and agree team- and project-leadership roles within group
- enable, facilitate and ensure effective internal and external group communications
- identify and meet group training needs
- give feedback to the group on overall progress; consult with, and seek feedback and input from the group


What is Individual as a factor of Adair’s Three Circle Model (1997)?

- understand the team members as individuals - personality, skills, strengths, needs, aims and fears
- assist and support individuals - plans, problems, challenges, highs and lows
- identify and agree appropriate individual responsibilities and objectives
- give recognition and praise to individuals - acknowledge effort and good work
- where appropriate reward individuals with extra responsibility, advancement and status
- identify, develop and utilise each individual's capabilities and strengths
- train and develop individual team members
- develop individual freedom and authority


What are the advantages of Adair’s Three Circles (1997)?

- Simple
- Focuses on satisfying task needs, team maintenance needs and individual needs – all contribute to teamwork
- Overlapping circles is a good reminder that all three must be paid attention


What are the Limitations of Adair’s Three Circles (1997)?

- No recognition of different cultures.
- Group environment not considered
- Specification of the nature of the task ignored
- Leadership outside the immediate team ignored
- Conflict and clumsiness between the group may cause delays


What is the Stages of Team Development Model (Tuckman, 1965)?

- A model developed by Tuckman in 1965 that shows the development of a team as it tackles a task from the initial formation of the team through o the completion of the project
- It has 5 different stages:
1. Forming
2. Storming
3. Norming
4. Performing
5. Adjourning

For the exam you need to show how you are going to move people between the stages


What is the Forming Stage of Team Development (Tuckman, 1965)?

- Team is assembled, and the task is allocated, time is spent planning, collecting information and bonding
- Atmosphere --> breaking the ice, first meeting, routine work
- Feelings --> excitement, Anxiety, Confusion
- Leader’s Action --> promote optimism, be directive, give clear roles and directions
- Issues --> Team members look to a leader or outside for guidance and direction, people work independently and do not know each other to unconditionally trust one another


What is the Storming Stage of Team Development (Tuckman, 1965)?

- The team starts to address the task suggesting ideas, different ideas may compete for ascendancy and if badly managed this phase can be very destructive for the team.
- Atmosphere --> Turbulence zone, lack of progress, conflict, critics & resistance
- Feelings --> Defensiveness, Competitiveness, Anger
- Leader’s Action --> Make members listen to each other, Encourage participation, promote respect, Stage focused on the task
- Issues --> team members resist the task demands and look for reason not to do it, concerns about the team hierarchy


What is the Norming Stage of Team Development (Tuckman, 1965)?

- This tends to be a move towards harmonious working practices with teams agreeing on the rules and values by which they operate
- Atmosphere --> Calm after the storm, Order & Cohesion, Consensus, Clarity
- Feelings --> Reassurance, Acceptance Trust
- Leader’s Action --> Delegate some tasks, stay involved, ensure members work collaboratively, Reinforced the team spirit
- Issues --> team becomes complacent and loses either their creative edge or the drive that brought them to this phase.
- Open exchange of views about team problems
- Team start to set up the procedure to deal with the task
- Ignore individual differences and members become more accepting of each other


What is the Performing Stage of Team Development (Tuckman, 1965)?

- “era of high performance” – performing teams are identified by high levels of independence, motivation, knowledge and competence
- Atmosphere--> On fire, decision making, problem solving, unity & fluidity
- Feelings -->Motivated, Integrated, Appreciation
- Leader’s Action --> Delegate as far as possible, monitor the progress, look for optimization, celebrate milestone achievements, be a gateway within the organization
- Resources allocated efficiently
- Able to solve problems and processes are in place to ensure that the final objective is achieved
- People share a common focus, communicate effectively and become more efficient and flexible as a result


What is the Adjourning Stage of Team Development (Tuckman, 1965)?

- End of the project and the breakup of the team
- Atmosphere --> Toward other, Horizons, Ending, Goodbye
- Feelings --> Satisfaction, Sadness, Uncertainty
- Leader’s Action --> Complete deliverables, capture best practices, Celebrate success


What are the advantages of Tuckman’s theory of Team Development (1965)?

- Provides a level of guidance for team development
- Help leaders/managers to know what to do in each phase


What are the limitations of Tuckman’s theory of Team Development (1965)?

- Note that the model was designed to describe stages in small groups
- In reality, group processes may not be as linear as Tuckman describes them, but rather cyclical
- Characteristics for each stage are not set in stone, and as the model deals with human behaviour, it is sometimes unclear when a team has moved from one stage to another, there may be overlap between the stages
- The model does not take account of the individual roles that team members will have to undertake --> compare to Belbin Team Roles
- There is no guidance on the timeframe from moving form one stage to another. This is a subjective as opposed to an objective model


How to move teams through the forming stage of Tuckman’s theory of Team Development (1965)?

- The successful coaching manager will ensure that the team meets and understands the team goals, the roles they have to take on and the rules by which they have to play.
- The coaching manager will realise that although there may be a great deal of agreement and compliance about what is discussed many people will have different interpretations of what is agreed.
- One to ones help but inevitably there will start to be undercurrents of disagreement as to what has exactly been agreed.


How to move teams through the storming stage of Tuckman’s theory of Team Development (1965)?

- Once the disagreements and blame start get the team quickly together to thrash out what the concerns and disagreements are.
- The coaching manager at this stage is strong, directive but also fair. The team needs direction at this stage and perhaps people need to hear things that perhaps they dot want to hear. Get things out in the open.
- Let the teamblee a little and then begin the healing process by facilitating their coming together.


How to move teams through the Norming stage of Tuckman’s theory of Team Development (1965)?

- Lessen the direction and spend time with individuals starting to coach them in relation to their roles within the team and the tasks that they have to perform.
- At the same time the manager will be challenging team members to take on extra capabilities in order to move the team on to the next stage.


How to move teams through the Performing stage of Tuckman’s theory of Team Development (1965)?

- Take a step back and allow the team to become self-directing. Be there for them and continue your coaching role with both team and individuals.
- Allow individuals to take on leadership roles and encourage rotation of roles. Communicate success and reward success accordingly.