Conflict and Knowledge Sharing with the Group - Coursework Example

Conflict and Knowledge sharing with the group Contents Contents 2 Introduction 3 Discussion 4 Events that occurred during group formation and their probable causes 4 Forming 4 Storming 5 Norming 6 Performing 6 Adjourning 6 Learning from the group and changes I would implement 7 What would be result if the same thing happened in an organisation 9 How Human Resource policies and/ or practices engender further success/mitigate such problems 11 Conclusion 12 References 14 Introduction The main purpose of our group assignment was to analyze different aspects of human resource management. Our group used various research techniques so as to critically analyze HRM concept. I gathered many experiences by being a part of this group and they can be effectively implemented in real time scenario. In this essay one such aspect of my overall experience will be highlighted. This will be my individual approach towards group conflict and purpose behind knowledge sharing with all group members. At the starting focus shall be on group development. I will even elaborate on my personal performance during group activity and this would comprise of both negative and positive aspects. Theories of conflict and group formation would also be incorporated in this essay as it helps to analyze well the current scenario. Knowledge sharing is a vital component in any organizational system. The main area of concern is to distribute knowledge properly so as to ensure that all group members are aware about internal and external conditions. Task effectiveness is totally based on the degree of knowledge sharing. If appropriate information is not provided to team members than it might lead to task failures or goals may not be accomplished. I believe that this particular aspect of knowledge sharing plays a critical role in personality development. It is also my area of interest and I feel proper analysis of this concept will be beneficial for me for long term. There are other related sections in this essay such as what I have learned during this assignment and its application on a modern world organization. At the end of essay few suggestions will be included that might help in resolving issues related to knowledge sharing and group conflict. Some summary remarks shall be made and this would be incorporated within conclusion. Discussion Events that occurred during group formation and their probable causes In order to discuss the concept and stages that lead to group formation I have reflected on available literature in this field as well as my own experiences that I faced during interactions with my group. In this essay however I will try to keep the narrative as close to the reality of my own experiences as follows occasionally drawing on available literature in support of my views. The stages of group behaviour had been spelled out by Tuchman in a model that he gave in 1965. In his model Tuchman suggested four stages of group formation, forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning. Tuchman model (Source: Johnson, 2009) Forming The group that was formed consisted of 6 members. I personally had a wish list when it came to choosing the persons or individuals whom I wanted to work with as a group. However the members’ chosen for my group was done randomly and therefore it was quite obvious that I did not get to work with the members of my choice. I found out while working with this new set that there were various types of individuals with different personality traits. But there were two broad traits under which they could be grouped. One group was more vociferous and dominant and the other was more timid. From the initial days itself it became apparent that the dominant would try to dominate over the timid and perhaps the seeds were sown for future conflict. Storming The second stage that followed was marked by tremendous conflict. The members fought amongst themselves over trivial matters but ultimately it appeared that the timid were kind of revolting against the dominant and there was an eager and continuous search for a leader to emerge out of the conflict. The particular project actually required knowledge to be shared amongst the individuals and it often happened people of the group did not like to share knowledge. The main thing that was focussed on was the aspect of knowledge sharing and how to facilitate knowledge sharing. Normally being in a group facilitates the process of knowledge sharing amongst group members. However there were certain members of our group who felt that the knowledge they possessed was their own property and so did not like to share that with others. There were also some group members who did not like to accept new ideas that came their way. They would like to project themselves as individuals who knew everything. This was one of the main reasons behind the initial conflicts that we faced as a group. In the initial stages everybody in the group thought more of the individual possession rather than collective knowledge. This was the source of conflict. Norming Out of the severe conflict that was taking place amongst the group members slowly a leader emerged who took the control in his hand. Soon most of us as a group understood that until and unless we as group members allowed free sharing of knowledge amongst us the main objective of group formation would be defeated and we might have to dismantle the group. However as spelled in the social efficacy theory soon the group members started falling in place and accepting and trying to imitate each other’s views(Endres, Endres, Chowdhury, and Alam, 2007). But for that to happen one had to emerge as the torch bearer. The one who emerged as the torch bearer ultimately came to be regarded as the leader of the group. The most important and brilliant thing that happened to us was that the leader chosen was very supporting and did not like to dominate on other group members nor did he try to impose his views. Everybody participated in decision making, knowledge sharing was made easy and information flowed freely once insecurity amongst group members disappeared. Performing After the leader was chosen all other conflicts soon resolved and the group started performing towards the desired goal. Progress was made in quick pace and everything started moving smoothly. After the problem of knowledge sharing was resolved and individuals were no longer afraid to share knowledge, knowledge moved freely. The free movement of knowledge actually helped the group members perform more coherently and in a fast pace. We as a group members understood that the same task which was taking long time when knowledge sharing was not occurring was now taking almost ¼ th of the time. Adjourning Actually I don’t remember when it dawned to us that the group we were in was not to last forever but would be dismantled after the task was finished. However it was a very sad realization. Over the course of the project we had come pretty close to each other and had actually become very good friends. Now it was very painful for us to separate. However we promised with each other before we parted to remain good friends and being touch always knowing full well that it was very difficult to actually achieve this in practice. Learning from the group and changes I would implement Through the group exercise that we did I learnt several things that I think have helped me to evolve as an individual. I learned through the group exercise that it was important to work collaboratively and coherently with all kinds of individuals without differentiating between them on any grounds. I understood that if knowledge or skill is shared amongst group members it always results in improvement of performance of overall group (Haas and Hansen, 2005). The same is the case both at small groups and for big organization as well. Although there was initially some conflict that arose on the grounds of knowledge not being shared, I understood that greater interaction amongst the group members facilitates knowledge sharing to take place (Turner and Makhija, 2006). The main thing is that the holders of knowledge should not feel threatened or insecure in sharing it. At first we as individuals held the belief that informal interactions that resulted when people indulge with each other in a group environment would result in breaking down of barriers and free sharing of knowledge amongst individuals. However over the progress of interaction period amongst group members we understood that whereas social groups facilitate sharing of knowledge amongst group members under informal setting, social capital is not an all inclusive umbrella and other theories and contingencies needed to be considered in this particular case (Adler and Kwon, 2002). At first in our group there were lot of conflicts within the group members on several issues. But over the course of interaction amongst the group members over the course of the project we came closer to each other. We have learned to appreciate each other’s views have empathy over other’s situations and learn to see the world from other’s view point. At first I as an individual laid more emphasis on my view, my perspective. However after interaction with the group, that view has certainly chanced and I have started inculcating us in place of me in my view points. I also learned a lot from the leader of the group regarding how to manage a group. The leader in our group managed the group so efficiently that from a group where members always fought amongst themselves we became a group where members were so close to each other that they were hard to separate. It is a matter of fact that we as group members had the initiative to come together and work as a group but still the contributions of the leader cannot be underestimated. The leader of the group through his well determined efforts succeeded in removing insecurity from the minds of the group members and encouraging them to collaborate and share information and knowledge amongst each other. I first had the view that most of the times the one who is mighty becomes the leader through his might. I thought that the mighty individual simply overthrows the competition and assumes the leadership role. I thought that most of the leaders actually don’t care and should not care about what other group members have to say and should do only the things that he feels is the need of the hour. However after interaction with our group leader I tried to appreciate the fact that leader always does not mean one who is mighty and rules by might. In fact he or she is quite the opposite. He is one who facilitates communication and interaction amongst group members. He finds a way to mitigate their fears by interacting with them more often. He also encourages intra group communication amongst group members so as to facilitate sharing of knowledge within the group. He understands and appreciates the value of interaction amongst group members and invites group members to present their views regarding important events of the group. The group members feel welcome to present their view points to the leader freely and without any barrier and he welcomes their suggestion with a smiling face. I learned by my interaction with him on how to be a good leader and probably if a future opportunity presents itself before me I would most likely accept the leadership role not by force but if willingly chosen. The thing that I would like to inculcate if given another assignment in a group is that I would like to shorten the initial phases of group formation that is forming, storming and norming phase. I would try so that the group members are able to adjust amongst themselves quickly and less time is actually wasted. What would be result if the same thing happened in an organisation I was negatively affected during group assignment since appropriate knowledge was not shared with me. In real time scenario some complex decisions are taken on the basis of knowledge sharing. Every group member possesses some expertise that might be beneficial for other group members. These members need to be aligned with common group objective and necessary information shall be accessed by all team members. If knowledge is not effectively shared amongst team members in real world organizations then proper decision cannot be formulated. There are various units in an organization and each of them has specific tasks to be performed (Deogratias, 2009). These tasks can only be effectively executed when proper information is available to all group members. When some team members are not aware about decisions being taken it results into lack of motivation in terms of achieving organizational goals. It can even result into organizational conflict since information is not transmitted at the right time (Styhre, 2012). On the other hand some team members may possess expertise or required skills and there is always a need to impart those skills on other team members. However no importance given to knowledge sharing might result into poor performance of overall team. In an organization context the groups are not treated and cannot be treated in isolation. Rather they are very much interlinked with the organization that they belong to. The organization culture of the organization influences and is in turn influenced by the individuals. The behaviour of the individuals and the group members mutually reinforce each other. The group members and the individuals in turn are also influenced by the organization. However the degree of interaction reinforcement of the behaviours that exists between the group members is more strong and pronounced than that exists between the group and the organization as a whole. The nested structure of the individual, group, and organization is shown in the following figure. Interaction between individual, group and organization (Source: Perlow, Gittell, and Katz, 2004) In an organizational context as with individual group it is very essential for the members to perform as a unit instead of performing as separate entities. So the collaboration becomes all the more important amongst members of the organization. In certain specific kinds of organization which are more knowledge based interaction and sharing of knowledge amongst organization members becomes all the more important. In order to facilitate interaction amongst group members the hr should and will take appropriate initiatives. How Human Resource policies and/ or practices engender further success/mitigate such problems For an organization it is very essential that knowledge should not be limited to a particular individual or group but percolate the entire organization. To facilitate knowledge sharing among different members of the organization it is necessary that there exists a collaborative atmosphere within the organization. The people should not feel threatened to share their knowledge nor do people feel threatened to accept new knowledge. To facilitate knowledge there are several theories available in the wide literature. One of the many theories is Diffusion of Innovation theory. The first postulate of the theory states that the knowledge that has to be shared should be simple and easy to understand, have relative advantage over existing knowledge that is found, should be compatible with the culture such that people adopting the same should not feel threatened (Murray, 2009). The second postulate of the theory states that most of the knowledge passes as a one way communication. However as compared to one way communication, two way communications always helps to better spread the knowledge amongst organization members. The third postulate states that individuals will more likely accept the information if they feel that there is an added social benefit associated with knowledge in addition to the knowledge as an asset. In this case the organization’s overall environment plays a major role. Another factor which plays an important role is who is endorsing the change. If the knowledge is being endorsed by somebody who is regarded highly then it is most likely that other individuals will accept the new knowledge more willingly. The forth postulate states that if the knowledge is shared by a member of the same community or an individual who is similar to the recipient. The fifth postulate states that individuals go through a six step process before finally accepting or rejecting knowledge. The steps are Awareness, Knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation and confirmation. The sixth postulate states that adopters fall into various categories depending on how fast or slow they are in adapting the information. The categories are innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards. According to another theory namely called social exchange theory knowledge sharing is negatively correlated with external rewards. For example if an employee feels that sharing a knowledge will lessen his chances in getting a particular reward he will be less likely to share it (Bock & Kim, 2002). Conclusion While writing this essay I have tried to reflect on my own experience while trying to correlate the same with available literature. I have felt that Tuchman’s scheme of four stages in group formation also applied to our group and we had four distinct stages such as forming, storming, norming and adjourning. The initial stages were marked by a lot of conflicts that was a result of inadequate knowledge sharing and finding of leaders in a leaderless situation. However the problems soon resolved with the finding of a leader who helped the issue of knowledge sharing and persuading individuals to share their knowledge. The group members were persuaded to share their knowledge by resolving their fears and encouraging them to indulge in greater interactions amongst themselves. I have over the course of writing this essay felt that conflicts are a fundamental part of not only individual groups but of organizations as a whole. Although conflicts affect an organization to a much greater extent than it affects a groups since the scope of application is much wider. Knowledge sharing is very important in case of an organization as well as in case of a group. Until knowledge is effectively shared amongst the group members the group members fail to exist and work coherently as a unit. Same is the case with the organization. In organization’s perspective too knowledge sharing is very fundamental and so is the key that different members or individuals work cohesively. In my analysis I have found as a conclusive of all the discussion that it is unavoidable to have conflict whether it is in an organization or in a group. In fact greater is the number of people involved greater is the scope of conflict. To resolve the conflict situation someone must accept the leadership role as early as possible and try to persuade and create a collaborative and cooperative environment in the organization aimed at resolving conflict. References Adler, P. S. and Kwon, S.W. 2002.Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), pp.17-40. Bock, G. W., & Kim, Y. G. 2002. Breaking the myths of rewards: An exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resources Management Journal.15(1). pp. 14-21. Deogratias, H., 2009. Cultural implications of knowledge sharing. USA: IGI Global. Endres, M. L., Endres, S. P., Chowdhury, S. K. and Alam, I. 2007. Tacit knowledge sharing, self-efficacy theory and application to the Open Source community. Journal of knowledge management.11 (3). pp. 92-103 Haas, M.R. and Hansen, M.T. 2005. When using knowledge can hurt performance: the value of organizational capabilities in a management consulting company’’, Strategic Management Journal. 26(1). pp. 1-24 Johnson, J., 2009. Health organizations: theory, behavior, and development. London: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Murray, Christine E. 2009. Diffusion of Innovation Theory: A Bridge for the Research‐Practice Gap in Counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development. 87(1). pp. 108-116. Perlow, L. A., Gittell, J. H. and Katz, N. 2004. Contextualizing patterns of work group interaction: toward a nested theory of structuration. Organization Science.15 (5).pp. 520-536. Styhre, A., 2012. Knowledge sharing in professions: roles and identity in expert communities. UK: Gower Publishing, Ltd. Turner, K. L. and Makhija, M. 2006. The role of organizational controls in managing knowledge. Academy of Management Review. 31(1).pp.197-217. Read More