Organizational Behavior - Essay Example

INTRODUCTION According to Organizational Behavior, McGraw Hill, a group is made up of two or more freely interacting people with shared norms and goals and a common identity. Groups can be formal or informal. Formal groups are formed by organization itself, and are focused on specific objectives that fulfill the organization’s needs. Informal groups are made up of small group of people who share activities and interests. In organizations, formal groups are made for different projects in order to divide the work among individuals. This makes the achievement of goals easier, and work is done more effectively. OUR PROJECT We were doing a group activity in our Organizational Behavior class. Our class was divided into groups of 6 students each. We were assigned a task to think up a new product strategy for men’s line in formal clothing for a multinational organization. Goal: A group, in order to work on a project, has to have some goals defined. These goals make the members focused towards their work, and they know the aims and objectives of their group. Our goal that we determined was to develop an innovative product, with affordable price. Duties: Our team was made by our organization, in which employees from different departments were participating, in order to create a new innovative product. We had 6 managers, each belonging to one of these areas: Finance, Production, Marketing, Research & Development, Human Resource, and Technical. DEVELOPMENT STAGES Usually groups go through five stages: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, and Adjourning. My group also went through the following stages. Forming: When we had our first meeting, our group was in the forming stage. We did not know our individual task roles. There was no designated leader of the team, by the organization. All the team members were trying to understand their roles. Some were initiating, trying to be the emergent leaders, some set aside waiting for the emergent leader to emerge and designate the tasks. Suggestions regarding projects came from every individual, and the emergent leader tried to organize them in structure. Storming: Then we entered the storming phase. Here a few conflicts emerged, and individuals tested the leader’s decisions. This stage was short, and we came out of this stage very quickly. Norming: In this stage, all the members started taking interest in the project. One person was settled to be the leader of our group. In this stage, the group members started bonding with each other, and developed a “we feeling”. Everyone developed the team spirit, and actively participated towards the group’s goals and objectives. All the members collectively decided the project plan. Performing: After Norming, we entered into the performing stage. In this stage the group members performed their individual roles, after deciding them in the norming stage. Everyone started actually working on the project. Adjourning: When our project was completed, we reached this last stage. In this stage, we bid farewell to each other. We felt a loss after working in a team because we had developed a strong bonding, and we liked working together. FUNCTIONAL ROLES There are two kinds of functional roles performed by group members: Task Roles and Maintenance roles. Task roles enable members to define or clarify their tasks and pursue a common purpose. Maintenance roles focus on maintaining good relationships between members in groups. TASK ROLES My team had the following task roles taken up by the members. Initiator: This member suggests different ideas or goals. The group leader, who always initiated the project’s plan, took up this task. Information seeker and Giver: This member always provided information regarding the project. She gathered information from different sources, and provided it to the group members in order to clarify different things. Orienter: Whenever our team had conflicts, this member always kept the group focused towards the goal. He tried his best to keep the members focused towards the main goals, and did not let them deviate from the objectives. Elaborator: This member always elaborated the tasks and procedures, to make them more clear to other members. This person had an imagination which always led him to elaborate the things with more real life examples. Recorder: One of the members always recorder whatever was discussed in the team meetings. She documented all the plans and outcomes on files. Evaluator: One member always evaluated the tasks and accomplishments of our group, by applying logic and practicality. He had devised standards on which he evaluated these accomplishments. MAINTENANCE ROLES According to the maintenance functions, we had the following roles. Encourager/Supporter: There were two members who always encouraged and supported other members in their ideas. Harmonizer: Whenever there was a conflict between the group members, one of the members always harmonized the others and settled the disputes between those members. Follower: Two of the members always followed quietly what others decided upon. They did not object much in the final decisions, and worked quietly on the plan devised by others. Tension releaser: One of the members always released tensions by bringing humor and making the tension or problem seem small to other members. CONCLUSION We went through different stages of groups, and took different individual roles according to tasks or maintenance. What we learned in the project is that working in group though looks simple and easy, has to be in a structured format. We sometimes ignore the group development stages while working in a group. But if we study them closely, we can bring more efficiency in our work. Same is the case with roles. Everyone plays a different role in a group. If we analyze these roles, we can perform better and give fruitful results. REFERENCES Robert kreitner RK & Angelo Kinicki AK 2008, ‘Group Dynamics’ in Organizational Behavior, Ed 8, McGraw Hill. Pathways to Higher Education 2006, Types of teams, viewed May 01, 2010 . Asuquo Bassey, July 02, 2006, ‘Formal Vs. Informal Groups/Organization’ viewed May 01, 2010 Leah M. Akins, Ph.D. 2001, ‘Functional Group Roles’, Maureen Clinton, Suffolk Community College. Read More