Groups and Team Working - Essay Example

Running Head: Groups and Team Working Groups and Team Working [Institute’s Groups and Team Working Groups are a vital part of an organisation while the communication and interaction among the members of different groups are basic elements, which help and support the achievement of organisational objectives. An organisation achieves its objectives more efficiently and effectively when people work as members of various groups in that organisation. People do not always behave in similar patterns as part of groups as they behave individually. The pattern of individual behaviour changes when people become parts of groups. A manager must also seek to analyse the patterns of group behaviour in order to take advantage of the positive energy of groups (Stroh, Northcraft and Neale, 2002, p.157). This paper analyses the behaviour of individuals when they become parts of groups and the collective behaviour of groups. The personal behaviour of people tends to change when they become parts of different groups as group objectives tend to subordinate individual objectives. The following sections of the paper present the definition of groups, theories on group behaviour, different types of groups, advantages and disadvantages of formal groups to the employer and employee, five dimensions of group structure and group development theory. Different people define groups in different ways with respect to formation of groups, reasons for formation of groups, roles of groups, characteristics of groups and the growth of groups. The collection of individuals either with an intention or without one is termed as a group. The formation of a group may be for a specific objective or for the accomplishment of several individual objectives. There are several theories regarding the formation of groups that include “propinquity theory, balance theory, exchange theory and organisation theory” (Nata, 2005, p.227). The propinquity theory suggests that groups form because of close geographical proximity. The balance theory views groups as a collection of people with similar behaviour and common objectives (Nata 2005 p.227). The exchange theory sets out a notion that groups form due to give and take behaviour of individuals where they make exchanges for achievement of common goals. According to the organizational theory, managers intentionally form groups for economic, social and security factors (Yukl, 2006, p.176). Various practitioners have studied groups in the workplace to analyse the behaviour of groups, interaction and communication of groups. Robert Owen studied groups in the organisation and concluded that individuals were important components of an organisation when working in groups. Dr. Hugo Munsterberg also presented theories on how to achieve maximum output by applying group motivational techniques. Chester I. Bernard presented the systems theory and presented the classification of formal and informal organisation. He suggests that a formal organisation can survive on several factors that include the ability of people to communicate with each other, facilitation of group interest and common goals of group members (Young, 2003, p.115). The most important breakthroughs in study of groups were the Hawthorne experiments carried out by Elton Mayo and his associates. The main objective of the experiments was to analyse the effects of illumination, break time and other working condition on the efficiency of workers but there was no impact of these factors on the efficiency. The real factor that influenced the efficiency of workers was the interrelationship of workers and the recognition of individuals as members of groups. The phenomenon of increase in efficiency due to recognition among group members is the Hawthorne Effect (Moen, Nolan and Provost, 1998, p.32). There are two main types of groups in an organisation that are formal groups and informal groups. Managers structure formal groups intentionally to accomplish organisational objectives. The formation of committees, special function groups, departments and task forces are types of formal groups, which managers use at several levels of organisations to achieve goals and objectives. Informal groups on the other hand are a result of common interests of individuals apart from the organisational objectives and do not have a specific structure and underlying intentions. Formal groups focus more on organisational objectives whereas informal groups benefit the members of the group. Members in a formal group have well defined roles and follow a structured set of rules, policies and regulations, whereas, members in an informal group do not have any predetermined roles and these roles change according to common goals and situations and an informal group does not formulate any rules, regulations and policies (Ivancevich, Konopaske and Matteson 2006 p.324). Informal groups usually have a shorter life as they stop existing when the common goals of the members are accomplished and members move on to other informal groups. There is a lack of structure and format in informal groups and members come and go from the groups as they please and examples of these groups include social circles like family, friends, co-workers and neighbours. Informal groups usually form without any prior intention and focus on resolving short-term issues rather than long term problem solving and objectives (Chevalier 2007 p.74). Formal groups on the other hand tend to be more structure and have specific formats and manager design them with prior intention either express or implied. The life of formal groups is also much longer than informal groups as the formation of these groups is dependent on resolution of continuing problems and achievement of long-term objectives. There is much more planning involved in formal groups and members usually stay the same from start to finish. Unlike informal groups formal groups have a particular objective and when the member achieve this objective the group members go on to achieve other objectives which are assigned to them. The examples of formal groups include divisions, departments, committees and task forces (Borkowski, 2008 p.314). Both formal and informal groups have their advantages and disadvantages for employees and employers alike. There are several advantages and disadvantages of formal groups, which not only influence the organisation but also affect the employees of that organisation as well. Following are some of the advantages of formal groups to the employer and employees. Formal groups elucidate the role each group member needs to perform and spell out the authority and responsibility of each of each group member which facilitates efficiency of the workers in achieving individual goals and the overall organising process is simplified for the manager and employer. The manager or employer collectively assigns a set of objectives to the group where individual goals are also set out which creates a suitable and appropriate functioning environment for the group members. The planning and controlling functions are much easier to implement on formal groups as compared to informal groups as duties and roles are easily distinguishable. There is a higher level of discipline, command and direction in formal groups. The existence of formal groups simplifies other management related tasks for both the employer and employees such as HR planning and management, compensation, development and training of employees. Some disadvantages of informal groups are as follows: The structure of formal groups is quite inflexible and any significant changes may result in a breakdown of the group. The level of commitment lowers down for employees who have other organisational responsibilities, which have a direct link to their personal objectives. The formation of formal groups increases the overall costs for an organisation, as it may need to cater to any special requirements of the group in order for it to function efficiently. The level of management increases for formal groups as the need for control and command increases with accomplishment or failure of groups. Lussier (2008, p.417) explained five dimensions of group structure which are types of groups, composition of groups, size of groups, leadership in groups and objectives of groups. The types of groups include formal and informal groups that have a direct impact on the group structure as explained previously. Other types of groups include functional and cross functional groups and command and task groups. The second dimension of group structure is the size of the group that affects the structure of the group. The larger a size of a group more complex will be the structure of that group. The third dimension is group composition that defines the sills and abilities of group members, if group members possess relevant and appropriate skills the group structure will be efficient otherwise irrelevant skills will render the group useless. Group leadership also determines the structure of the group as the leader may change the structure of the group according to specific needs and requirements. Group objectives are the last dimension of a group which impact the structure of a group as a group structure depends entirely on objectives. The structure of a group will be entirely different for two different sets of objectives (Appelrouth and Edles, 2007, p.341). There are several theories on group development, and how groups grow and succeed through various stages. The most suitable and elegant theory of group development was put forward by Dr. Bruce Tuckman. Dr. Tuckman established a model of forming, storming, norming, and performing (Weinberg and Gould, 2007, p.162). He explained the various stages groups go through to accomplish group objectives and eventually organisation objectives. The first stage in the group development process is forming which includes the formation of the group and introduction of group members with each other and with the task assigned to the group. The second stage of the group is storming where group members start discussing issues relevant to the problem and become more acquainted with each other and the problem and start to resolve problems assigned to the group. The third stage of group development is norming where group members establish norms, policies, procedure and rules. The fourth stage of Tuckman’s model was performing where group members actually accomplish the task or solve the problem and arrive at a common conclusion and the group finally applies the conclusion to solve the problem. Dr. Tuckman later added a fifth stage to his model that was the stage of adjourning and the group members separate in order to abolish the group formally and the group delivers and forwards the conclusion and solution to the problems to the relevant departments or personnel (Weinberg and Gould, 2007, p.162). The above discussion provides evidence that there are several ways in which groups form and there are several types of groups, which benefit the organisation in various ways. The discussion provides a conclusion that formal groups play a very important role in achieving company and individual objectives and managers need to design groups in a structure that is quite efficient and supports the overall function of management. Managers also need to understand how groups grow and flow in order to be able to control and manage groups efficiently and Dr. Tuckman’s forming, norming; storming and performing model is the best model for understanding functioning of groups. List of References Appelrouth, S. and Edles, L. D. (2007). Classical and contemporary sociological theory: text and readings. Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press. Borkowski, N. (2008). Organizational Behavior, Theory, and Design in Health Care. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Chevalier, R. (2007). A managers guide to improving workplace performance. New York: AMACOM Division of American Management Association. Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R. and Matteson, M. T. (2006). Organizational Behavior and Management. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill. Lussier, R. N. (2008). Management Fundamentals: Concepts, Applications, Skill Development. Mason: South-Western Cengage Learning. Moen, R. D., Nolan, T. W. and Provost, L. P. (1998). Quality improvement through planned experimentation. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. Nata, R. (2005). New directions in higher education. New York: Nova Publishers. Stroh, L. K., Northcraft, G. B. and Neale, M. A. (2002). Organizational behavior: a management challenge. London: Routledge. Weinberg, R. S. and Gould, D. (2007). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. Champaign: Human Kinetics. Young, S. (2003). Moral capitalism: reconciling private interest with the public good. San Fransisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in Organizations. New Delhi: Pearson Education. Read More