The Dynamics of Group Behavior - Assignment Example

Abstract Understanding the behavior of individuals in groups and the way they carry out their tasks such as how to solve a problem or how to make decisions is very important. Relevant to the fields of psychology is the study of groups and group behavior. This involves how each member behaves in isolation or how the group carries itself on in the corporate sense. The relationships between members of a group with other parties outside the group all affect its performance. Specific dynamic processes that change groups and the way their members behave include norms, role of each member in particular or the group in general, their relationship patterns, development, cohesiveness among others. This paper explores those dynamics and the way they determine group behavior. It accounts for the various definitions of a group, group behavior and group dynamics. Introduction Thenmozhi defines a group as one that comprises two individuals and/or more whose interaction and dependence is mutual to achieve definite and particular objectives. The key word here being interaction affirms that those in a group are bound to interact and exchange in matters of ideas and opinions. Members of a group can agree in some issues or disagree, each having his/her point of view that is different from those of others according to their standpoints. Thenmozhi adds that group behavior radiates from that which leads to the group’s success. Group success is the goal of each individual member of the group and their endeavor should be to make the group successful. He calls it the groupthink – the solidarity of a group in terms of structure, role, leadership, norms, status, hierarchy and cohesiveness. Every group develops its own peculiar set of characteristics pertaining to structure, roles, norms, cohesiveness and processes. A set criterion that all groups must have this or that attribute in the name of structure, that members should assume this or that role or that the group must design such and such norm does not exist. All these are distinct with the group. They spell out the uniqueness of that group. Neill shares this definition with a view that when two or more people who enjoy a common description in terms of behavior and evaluation come together, they form a group. Accordingly, people who form a group must interact among themselves and in the process accept the rights and the definite obligations of membership. He further looks at a group as a system that is only workable on the standpoints of the elements of their interaction. This interaction occurs along with the external factors that influence the group formation, invite challenges and interpret group results. When dealing with matters of groups, Articlesbase.com observes, it is important to ensure that there is health and productivity. As such, fundamental communication skills, set based on interpersonal relationships, are applicable for the group. This will promote good interactive abilities among individual members thereby creating a safe and effective environment for the group to work. These fundamental principles are the dynamics that influence the behavior and operation of each member within the group. It is not possible to do away with groups. Groups make us, far from the common belief that we make groups. In our daily activities, we move from one group to another. We live and dwell as a group or part of a group; we work and learn in groups, we spend our leisure time making friends in groups. Our family alone is a big or small group depending on its size. To say the least, man is a social being and thus conducts his affairs in groups. Therefore, group mentality is the greatest instinct of man besides food. McMillan informs that the relevance of group dynamics cuts across both the formal and informal groups. Groups help a lot in organization. They refer to the attitudes and characteristic behaviors of a group or/and its members. In order to study organizational behavior, it is of utmost importance to study group dynamics. The criteria of studying the dynamics that influence group behavior lie on group development. The rationale for the development of a group lays foundation for the study of group dynamics. Accordingly, the social theory explains a group better. This theory explains that individuals come together in expectation of a beneficial exchange. This means that socially, they follow their instincts of trust and obligation. Another theory is the classic theory, which asserts that those who come together do so because of common activities and sentiments. Because of this, their level of interaction goes high. As noted earlier, interaction is what binds the people who come together. The social identity theory gives one more reason why groups form. McMillan asserts that individuals develop the sense to belong. This is to follow the desire to have their affiliate needs met. It is normal when one strives to affiliate oneself to a particular group. By belonging to a group, one develops a sense of self-esteem about himself and amongst the members. Individuals develop a sense of belonging and this will motivate him/her to participate positively knowing that he/she is part of the group. The reason why groups form and how they do so is studied within the confines of group dynamics. Bruce Tuckman was the first psychologist to examine how groups form. According to McMillan, the formation of groups takes place in stages of development in their struggle to perform well. However, it is important to note that whatever these stages are, they apply across all/most of the groups. Tuckman's theory acknowledges five important stages of group development namely forming, norming, storming, performing and adjourning. Forming is described as a period of orientation where members learn the rationale and import of the group. It is a period for the establishment of trust and openness. It is a time of creating the first impression amongst the members because not even leadership has been determined. Storming is the stage where power and leadership are established. ‘Who’ becomes ‘what’ and responsibilities are drawn. Hampton in this says that we should not forget to designate leadership. Some people desire to be leaders; others self-impose themselves while others only like to criticize leadership. All these are the people who help facilitate to get the group start going. Everybody has a role to play. He says there are those who are talkers, the dumper, the attack-the-leader, the spoiler, the dominator and the like. All these should be understood to be part of the group for there is no ideal group with people of similar attributes. If we use them positively for the purposes of the group’s advancement, there can be improved performance. Here, members get an opportunity to resolve conflicts. Care must be taken at this level because without it, the continuity of the group is at serious stake. At this stage, referred to as norming, the group members spell out the group’s norms. Group members get to know what the group stands for as well as the rationale for its establishment. Here, there is serious brainstorming and members display their differences in opinions and expectations to create what is normally referred to as the group’s constitution. In this stage, members have gathered courage and magnanimity to express the need for cohesion and togetherness. Performing does not occur if a group has not reached maturity and if it has not attained distinct cohesiveness. Here, individuals get to acknowledge a sense of maturity. They understand and accept one another as a party. This is the stage of conflict resolution and brainstorming. Rational process is the only way through which members make decisions. Leaders do not make unilateral decisions any longer. Our performance is often times influenced by other members of the group in such a way that their presence can create an impetus for us to perform better than we otherwise would. We are not really competing but they act as pace makers. Talking about norms, McMillan notes that these are acceptable code of behavior observed by members of a group, whose principle role is to define the frontiers of acceptable dos and don’ts. Norms are created in order to benefit the group, for the survival of the members and to buffer them against situations that can or may be embarrassing. Norms are also created in order to shield the group from ridicule. It is incumbent upon the group leadership to instill the norms. Accordingly, there are performance norms, which spell out the rate of work of each individual member of the group as well as quantifying and qualifying their output. The essence of the performance norms is to determine the level at which each individual works. Performance norms may limit the output of an individual worker or enhance it depending on their effectiveness. Another category of norms is the reward-allocation norms, which spell out the criteria for giving out incentives to members of the group. It then follows that each member should be rewarded fairly and equitably. The reward-allocation norms include equity norms, norms of equality and the social responsibility norms, which show that not all members of the group are blessed equally and thus they should be allocated resources or given attention according to their social standing (McMillan, para29). Mackenzie on his part points out that typically, norms are what the group stands for. Norms spell out the behavior and the general contribution expected of every group member that stands for the group’s identity. Cohesiveness is the sticking together of the members of the group and their mental aptitude to remain well connected for the glory of the group. Group members may have the desire to cross each other but because of the principle of cohesiveness, they choose to remain attached to the group and its interests for higher productivity. This means that cohesiveness does not necessarily mean that group members do not have individual differences, it rather means that their differences notwithstanding, they are bonded together to increase productivity. It is worthy to note that in order to remain cohesive; most groups have chosen to remain as small as possible, have minimized internal threats and taken much time to work together. Cohesion constitutes an individual’s desire to achieve goals for the group. In this respect, an individual develops a feeling that he/she should not be the one to bring down the group, even to interfere with its ideals. This is cohesion. Stability can affect cohesion, in which case the stability of a group depends on how longer the members stick together. Similarity also affects it such that if the members have specific commonness in terms of sex, age, skills, attitudes and values, then, they tend to stick together and thus promote cohesion. Other factors are size, support and satisfaction. For a group to remain cohesive, it must enjoy collective identity, a sense of shared purpose and structured patterns of communication (Mackenzie, para4). Sniezek enlightens that the study of group dynamics educates on how to integrate different aspects in groups brought about by different members, as well as dealing with the negativism that exist in groups. Diversity issues break groups. It is important to study group dynamics in order to know how to battle the problem of diversity. However, looking at what has brought these people together to form a group; it is in this view ideal to say that groups, consisting of people who interact with one another after having attracted each other socially therefore sharing a social identity, are distinguished by that particular group. Theirs is different from other groups, which other people form, obviously for other reasons. He argues that the zeal with which the group members want to meet the common goal of the group and to sustain its identity determines group’s cohesion. Cohesion explains the group behavior and its relationship with its members as well as the outside groups. A well performing group will be determined by how well and how much its members are attracted to its norms. This as well tells the level of its cohesiveness. Three factors characterize a cohesive group namely a common identity, a shared purpose and a well-structured pattern of communication. These factors are dependent upon the level of interaction of the members amongst themselves and the outside. Members must have something in common amongst themselves, something like their sex, age, race, attitudes and values. This is particularly important in order to empower them to create congenial norms, norms that do not conflict with their beliefs and with their general behavior. They must be pleased with every member’s contribution, the role that everyone plays in the group and the performance of the group itself. The extent of this pleasure promotes the image of the group because members feel good about it and thus talk good about it. When they compare each member’s contribution, their goals, behaviors among others, they should find that they are in complete tandem with the group’s norms. This has a direct bearing on the performance of the group and the group members who are bound by the same norms feel satisfied with each other’s abilities to make the group proud. This promotes the cohesion of the group. However, groups consisting of members who do not conform to its norms on every/most aspects feel bad about the contribution of other members and in return, the performance of the group dissatisfies members, because they have killed their own morale (Sniezek, para8). Conclusion It is important to note that groups are a community's way of life and group behavior spells out the individual and public truths about interactions. Some groups are temporary whereas others are permanent or almost permanent. Each of the cases is bound by dynamics that govern its formation, progression and performance. Each person in a group is a solid entity and can influence what the group becomes without disregarding the other members. Therefore, the behavior of the members involved governs group goals and individual goals as well. In this regard, each person passes through a developmental rigor to become indispensable with a peculiar impact upon the group and in return, the group has a peculiar impact upon the individual. As a corporate entity, the group instills certain dynamics that must take place within it and may largely have an impact on the group in order to bring the desired performance. It is therefore upon those who desire to start groups to acknowledge the fact that there are specific dynamics that govern the behavior of a group in general and the members in particular. References Articlesbase.com, (2010). Understanding Group Behavior: Dynamics and Counseling. Retrieved 3rd August, 2010, from http://www.articlesbase.com/psychology-articles/understanding-group-behaviour-dynamics-and-counselling-139770.html Hampton, J. (2006). Group Dynamics and Community Building. Retrieved 2nd August, 2010, from http://www.community4me.com/roleplay.html Mackenzie, B. (2010). Group Dynamics. Retrieved 2nd August, 2010, from http://www.brianmac.co.uk/group.htm McMillan, A. (2010). Group Dynamics. Retrieved 3rd August, 2010, from http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/management/Gr-Int/Group-Dynamics.html Neill, J. (2004). Group Dynamics, Processes & Development. Retrieved 1st August, 2010, from http://wilderdom.com/Group.html Sniezek, S. M. (2007). How Groups Work: A Study of Group Dynamics and its Possible Negative Implications. Retrieved 1st August, 2010, from http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/481 Thenmozhi, M. (2008). Group Behavior. Retrieved 1st August, 2010, from http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/IIT-MADRAS/Management_Science_I/Pdfs/7_1.pdf Read More