Session 1-4

10/19/2014
Session 1-4
Tuckmans Five-Stage Theory

Feeling of
Team spirit is
experienced
Return to
Independence
Performing
Adjourning
Norming
Storming
Forming
Climate of open
communication, strong
cooperation and lots of
helping behavior
Roles
Goals
Trust
Dependence
10/19/2014
Tuckmans Five-Stage Theory

Enhancing the Quality
of Interpersonal
relationships
Task accomplishment
Performing
Norming
Storming
Forming
Reference: McGrew, Bilotta & Deeney, 1999
Performing
De-norming
De-storming
De-forming
Erosion of
standards of
conduct
Group Decay
Discontent
surfaces and
cohesiveness
Care Little beyond

their self-imposed
borders
a software development team
10/19/2014
1. Should not become complacent upon reaching the performing

stage
2. Awareness is the first line of defense
3. Constructive steps need to be taken to bolster cohesiveness
even when the work groups seem to be doing their best
Groups
Teams
Individual
Contribution
Performance
Depends on ..
Individual and
Collective
Individual Outcomes
Accountability
rests on ..
Mutual Outcomes
Common Goals
Members are
interested in ..
Common Goals and

Commitment to
Purpose
Demands of
Management
Responsive to ..
Self-imposed
Demands
10/19/2014
Temporary Groups with Deadlines
(High)
Performance
Phase 2
Completion
First
Meeting
Transition
Phase 1
(Low)
A
(A+B)/2
Time
Punctuated-Equilibrium Model
(High)
Performance
Phase 2
Completion
First
Meeting
Transition
Phase 1
(Low)
A
(A+B)/2
Time
10/19/2014
Productivity
No of
Members
Reference: John, G. (1996). Organizational Behavior: Understanding and
Managing Life at Work. Harper Collins, Page - 251
How many group members is too many?

Mathematical Modeling
Approach
Laboratory Simulation
Approach
3 to 13
Increase in group size
1. Positive effects of team building
2. Group leaders tend to be more
directive
3. Member satisfaction
If high quality decision quality is important

If generation of Creative ideas is the objective
Odd number of groups are recommended if the issue is to be
settled by a majority vote
10/19/2014
As the size of the team increases beyond 20 members, the level of

natural cooperation among members of the team decreases
Reference: Gratton, L & Erickson, T. J. (2007). Eight ways to build collaborative

teams. Harvard Business Review.
Group Intelligence
Members with higher IQs
Groups that had smart people dominating
conversation were not very intelligent groups
the
In great groups: Not that members are all really smart but
that they listen to each other. They share criticism
constructively
Group intelligence had relatively little to do with
individual intelligence
Reference: Anita Woolley and Thomas Malone (2011). What Makes a Team Smarter? More Women, Harvard
Business Review.
10/19/2014
Collective Intelligence
Percentage of Women
Members
Individual Intelligence
Reference: Anita Woolley and Thomas Malone (2011). What Makes a Team Smarter? More Women, Harvard
Business Review.
Effect of Men and Women working together in

Groups
Men
interrupted women
significantly more
often than
Attitude Shift
Neutral to negative
Favorable to neutral
Police
Nursing
Women
Interrupted men
and women equally
Keep the Domain
Share the Domain
10/19/2014
Men responded more negatively than did women to being in

the numerical minority in their work groups (Tsai et al., 1992).
Men responded with more negative work attitudes to
increased group heterogeneity than did women (Wharton and
Baron, 1987).
Men who were outnumbered by women were less satisfied
and less committed than when they were less outnumbered,
while
Womens satisfaction and commitment were unaffected by
the Gender composition of their work groups (Tsui et al., 1992).
Men and womens different reactions lies in differences in

their status in society and how these differences play out
at work (Chaman & OReilly, 2004).
10/19/2014
As the attitude towards the role of women have changed in

contemporary society, differences in social participation have
also begun to diminish
- Nielsen (1990)
Marriage: Mens attitude toward working

Women
Sreedhari D. Desai, Dolly Chugh & Aurthur P. Brief (2014). The Implications of Marriage
Structure for Mens Workplace Attitudes, Beliefs, and Behaviors towards Women.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(2), 330-365.
10/19/2014
Marriage: Mens attitude toward working

Women
Sreedhari D. Desai, Dolly Chugh & Aurthur P. Brief (2014). The Implications of Marriage
Structure for Mens Workplace Attitudes, Beliefs, and Behaviors towards Women.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 59(2), 330-365.
Cohesiveness
Group
Reward
Member
Interaction
External
Challenges
Group
Size
Agreement with
Team Goals
Somewhat
Difficult Entry
Reference:
John,
G.
(1996).
Organizational
Behavior:
Understanding and Managing Life at
Work. Harper Collins.
Cohesiveness
Success
Before
After
Time
10
10/19/2014
Group Cohesiveness
Performance
Norms
Cohesiveness
Productivity
Cohesiveness
PerformanceHigh
related
Norms
Low
High
Low
High Productivity
Moderate Productivity
Low Productivity
Moderate/ Low Productivity
Deviant Behaviour
55
22
Lying
23
Cheating
29
10
Stealing
11
10/19/2014
Norm
Help the group survive

Simplify behavioral expectations
Help in avoiding embarrassing situations
Clarify groups central values/ unique identity
How Norms are Developed
Explicit statement by supervisors or co-workers

Critical events in groups history
Primacy
First behavioral patterns that that emerges in a group
Carryover behaviors from past situations
12
10/19/2014
Role
Expected Behavior for a given Position

Others expectations > Ones Ability
Others have conflicting or inconsistent Expectations
Others Expectations are Unknown
Zimbardos Prison Experiment

Set up a fake prison using student
volunteers
Randomly assigned student volunteers
to guard and prisoner roles
13
10/19/2014
A follow up study by BBC

Guards were more careful in their
behavior
Concerned about how their actions
might be perceived
Prisoners and guards

behave
differently
when
they
are
monitored
An egalitarian system developed

between prisoners and the guards
Abuse of roles can be limited when people are made

conscious of their behavior
A socially defined position or rank given to groups or

group members by others
14
10/19/2014
The power a person wields over others

A persons ability to contribute to a groups goals
An individuals personal characteristics
High status people are given more freedom to deviate from norms
Tend to be more assertive members
Criticize/ state more commands / interrupt others more often
Inhibit diversity of ideas
Size
Cohesiveness
Properties of
Groups
Roles
Norms
Status
15
10/19/2014
Conformity
There is no direct request to comply with the group

nor
Any reason to justify the behavior change
The convergence of individuals thoughts, feelings, and

behavior toward a group norm
16
10/19/2014
Need for Acceptance/

Approval of Others
Normative
Influence
Need for Certainty
Subjective
Uncertainty
Power of others to
Reward/Punish
Need for information

to reduce uncertainty
Conflict between own
and others opinions
Comparison with
others
Compliance
Internalization
Private Disagreement
Test line
Public Acceptance
Informational
Influence
Private Acceptance
Comparison Line
17
10/19/2014
Distortion of individual judgment by a unanimous but

incorrect opposition
Asch Effect
Results
33% went along with the group on a majority of the trials
25% remained completely independent
75% conformed at least once
When tested alone (no confederates), subjects got more than
98% of the judgments correct
When tested with confederates, they only got 66% of the
judgments correct
18
10/19/2014
The Asch Experiment

Conformity Level
Number of Confederates
If there is one dissenting voice, the dramatic effects of

conformity are erased
Determinants
Visibility
Importance of the issue
Low individual confidence
Strong commitment to the group
Difficult/ Ambiguous Issues
High status people
19
10/19/2014
Total force exerted by the

group increases
Add more and more
people to a group
The average force exerted

by each group member
declines
The phenomenon in which participants, who work together,

generate less effort than do participants who work alone
Social Loafing
20
10/19/2014
Increasing Group Size, Increasing Group Output
Does social loafing occur in brainstorming groups
But Decreasing Individual Input
21
10/19/2014
Does social loafing occur more often in individualistic

or in collectivistic cultures?
Earley (1989) showed that:
American groups (individualistic) loafed more than
Chinese groups (collectivistic)
Accountability reduced loafing in American groups but not
in Chinese groups
Motivation strategies
Coordination strategies
Increase identifiability
Promote involvement
Reward team members for
performance
Strengthen team cohesion
Provide team performance
reviews and feedback
Using single-digit teams

Training team members together
Spending more time practicing
Minimizing links in
communication
Setting clear performance
standards
Reference: Thompson, L. L. (2003). Making the team: A guide for managers. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
22
10/19/2014
Zajonc et al. (1969)
Social Facilitation
Presence of others affect our performance on tasks
The presence of other people increases arousal, which then
facilitates dominant, well-learned habits but inhibits nondominate, poorly learned habits (Zajonc, 1965).
Well-learned
(dominant)
response
Poorly learned
or novel
(non-dominant)
response
Social Facilitation
Performance enhanced
Arousal caused
by presence of
others
Social Interference
Performance hindered
23
10/19/2014
75
70
Time to Complete Task (seconds)
65
60
55
50
Novel Task
45
40
Well-learned Task
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Alone
Mere Presence
Condition
Experimenter
watching
Does the mere presence of another person lead to social

facilitation effects?
Schmitt et al. (1986) asked college students to type their
names either forward (easy task) or backward (difficult
task). Subjects were either alone, in the presence of a
watching experimenter, or in the presence of another subject
who was wearing a blindfold and earphones.
Subjects showed social facilitation effects (that is, less time
taken on the easy task, more time taken on the difficult task)
even when the person present could not see them.
24
10/19/2014
Why is arousal due to the presence of other people?
Biological (presence alone leads to physiological arousal)

Evaluation concerns (by others)
Concentration/Focus
Group Shift/ Polarization

Group discussions sometimes lead to more extreme views
on the position they (individually) would prefer.
Conservative become more cautious
Aggressive types become more aggressive
The decision of the group depends on the dominant prediscussion norm.
25
10/19/2014
Discussion makes the members more comfortable with

each other: more bold and daring
Diffusion of responsibility
They take extreme positions to show that they are
different from the out group
Challenger Launch
On January 28, 1986 America was

shocked by the destruction of the
space shuttle Challenger, and the
death of its seven crew members
26
10/19/2014
Groups become more concerned with reaching

consensus than with reaching consensus in a way
that ensures its validity
Groupthink
Invulnerability
Illusion of
Unanimity
Inherent
Morality
Excessive
Stereotyping
Symptoms of
Groupthink
Pressure for
Conformity
Collective
Rationalization
SelfCensorship
Mindguards
27
10/19/2014
Antecedents of Groupthink
Highly cohesive groups
Group Structure
Homogeneous members
Directive leadership
Unsystematic procedures
Stressful Situations
Avoiding Groupthink
The leader should be neutral
Group size
High status members offer opinions last
The leader should give high priority to members airing
objections and doubts, and be willing to accept criticism
Groups should always consider unpopular alternatives,
assigning the role of devil's advocate to several strong members
of the group
Outside experts should be included in vital decision making
28
10/19/2014
Two heads are better than One!

The benefits of two heads require that they differ in relevant
skills and abilities
The group members must be able to communicate their ideas
freely and openly. This requires an absence of hostility and
intimidation
The task being undertaken is complex. Relative to individuals,
groups do better on complex rather than simple tasks
Thank You
29

Session 1-4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Session 1-4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Session 1-4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10/19/2014

Tuckmans Five-Stage Theory

Tuckmans Five-Stage Theory

Reference: McGrew, Bilotta & Deeney, 1999

Care Little beyond

a software development team

1. Should not become complacent upon reaching the performing

Common Goals and

Temporary Groups with Deadlines

How many group members is too many?

If high quality decision quality is important

As the size of the team increases beyond 20 members, the level of

Reference: Gratton, L & Erickson, T. J. (2007). Eight ways to build collaborative

Effect of Men and Women working together in

Keep the Domain

Share the Domain

Men responded more negatively than did women to being in

Men and womens different reactions lies in differences in

As the attitude towards the role of women have changed in

Marriage: Mens attitude toward working

Marriage: Mens attitude toward working

Moderate/ Low Productivity

Help the group survive

How Norms are Developed

Explicit statement by supervisors or co-workers

Expected Behavior for a given Position

Zimbardos Prison Experiment

A follow up study by BBC

Prisoners and guards

An egalitarian system developed

Abuse of roles can be limited when people are made

A socially defined position or rank given to groups or

The power a person wields over others

There is no direct request to comply with the group

The convergence of individuals thoughts, feelings, and

Need for Acceptance/

Need for Certainty

Need for information

Distortion of individual judgment by a unanimous but

The Asch Experiment

If there is one dissenting voice, the dramatic effects of

High status people

Total force exerted by the

The average force exerted

The phenomenon in which participants, who work together,

Increasing Group Size, Increasing Group Output

Does social loafing occur in brainstorming groups

But Decreasing Individual Input

Does social loafing occur more often in individualistic

Using single-digit teams

Zajonc et al. (1969)

Time to Complete Task (seconds)

Does the mere presence of another person lead to social

Why is arousal due to the presence of other people?

Biological (presence alone leads to physiological arousal)

Group Shift/ Polarization

Discussion makes the members more comfortable with

On January 28, 1986 America was