Organizational Behaviour Group (Robbins) 1

7/31/2019 Organizational Behaviour Group (Robbins) 1

1/25

Group Property 2: Norms

Norms Acceptable standards of behavior within a group that are

shared by the groups members

Classes of Norms

Performance norms - level of acceptable work

Appearance norms - what to wear

Social arrangement norms - friendships and the like

Allocation of resources norms - distribution and

assignments of jobs and material

9-0


2/25

Group Norms and the Hawthorne Studies

A series of studies undertaken by Elton Mayo at Western Electric

Companys Hawthorne Works in Chicago between 1924 and 1932

First, they examined relation between the physical environment

and productivity.

Experiment group - varying intensity of illumination.

Control group - constant intensity of illumination

Results were bewildering - productivity increased in the

experiment group even if the light intensity was increased or

decreased. Productivity decrease only when the light intensity

had been reduced to moonlight.

9-1


3/25

The Hawthorne Studies

Second experiment in relay assembly test room, wheresmall group of women was isolated from the main workgroup.

Only significant difference was that in place of observer aresearch assistant was kept.

The result showed personal absences and due to sicknesswere approximately one-third of those in regularproduction department.

Third experiment in bank wiring observation roomintroduced a sophisticated wage incentive plan.

The assumption was that individual workers wouldmaximize their productivity when they saw that it wasdirectly related to economic rewards.

The result was their output became controlled by a groupnorm that determined what was proper day's work.


4/25

The Hawthorne Studies

Research Conclusions

Worker behavior and sentiments were closely related.

Group influences (norms) were significant in affecting

individual behavior.

Group standards (norms) were highly effective in

establishing individual worker output.

Money was less a factor in determining worker output than

were group standards, sentiments, and security.


5/25

Norms and Behavior

Conformity

Gaining acceptance by adjusting ones behavior to align

with the norms of the group

Reference Groups

Important groups to which individuals belong or hope

to belong and with whose norms individuals are likely

to conform

Solomon Asch Studies

Demonstrated the power of conformance

Will the pressures to conform result in an unsuspecting

subject (USS) altering his/her answer to align with the

others?

9-4


6/25

Deviant Workplace Behavior

Also called antisocial behavioror workplace incivility

Voluntary behavior that violates significant organizational

norms and, in doing so, threatens the well-being of the

organization

Typology:

Production working speed, Leaving early, Wasting

resources

Property damage and stealing, lying about hoursworked

Political favoritism and gossip

Personal Aggression sexual harassment, verbal abuse

Defying Norms: Deviant Workplace Behavior

9-5


7/25

Group Influence on Deviant Behavior

Group norms can influence the presence of deviant

behavior

Simply belonging to a group increases the likelihood of

deviance Being in a group allows individuals to hide creates a false

sense of confidence that they wont be caught

9-6


8/25

Group Property 3: Status

Status Characteristics Theory

Status derived from one of three sources:

Power a person has over others

Ability to contribute to group goals

Personal characteristics

Power over

Others

Ability to

Contribute

Personal

Characteristics

GroupMember

Status

A socially defined position or rank given to groups or groupmembers by others it differentiates group members

Important factor in understanding behavior

Significant motivator


9/25

Status Effects

On Norms and Conformity

High-status members are less restrained by norms and

pressure to conform

Some level of deviance is allowed to high-status

members so long as it doesnt affect group goal

achievement

On Group Interaction

High-status members are more assertive

Large status differences limit diversity of ideas and

creativity

On Equity

If status is perceived to be inequitable, it will result in

various forms of corrective behavior

9-8


10/25

Group Property 4: Size

Group size affects behavior

Size:

Twelve or more members is a large group

Seven or fewer is a small group

Best use of a group:

9-9

Attribute Small Large

Speed X

Individual Performance X

Problem Solving XDiverse Input X

Fact-finding Goals X

Overall Performance X


11/25

Issues with Group Size

Social Loafing

The tendency for individuals to expend less effortwhen working collectively than when workingindividually

Ringelmanns Rope Pull: greater levels of productivity

but with diminishing returns as group size increases Caused by either equity concerns or a diffusion of

responsibility (free riders)

There will be a reduction in efficiency where

individuals think that their contribution cannot bemeasured.

Group Size

Performance


12/25

Managerial Implications

Build in individual accountability

Prevent social loafing by:

Setting group goals

Increase intergroup competition

Use peer evaluation

Distribute group rewards based on individual effort


13/25

Group Property 5: Cohesiveness

Degree to which group members are attracted to each

other and are motivated to stay in the group

Managerial Implication

To increase cohesiveness: Make the group smaller.

Encourage agreement with group goals.

Increase time members spend together.

Increase group status and admission difficulty.

Stimulate competition with other groups.

Give rewards to the group, not individuals.

Physically isolate the group.

9-12


14/25

Relationship Between Group Cohesiveness,

Performance Norms, and Productivity


15/25

Group Structure - Composition

Group DemographyThe degree to which members of a group share a common

demographic attribute, such as age, sex, race, educational

level, or length of service in the organization, and the

impact of this attribute on turnover

Cohorts

Individuals who, as part of a group, hold a commonattribute.


16/25

Group Processes

Synergy

An action of two or more substances that

results in an effect that is different from

the individual summation of the

substances

Social-facilitation effect

The tendency for performance to

improve or decline in response to the

presence of others.


17/25

+

=

Effects of Group Processes


18/25

Group Decision Making

Decision-making

Large groups facilitate the pooling of information about complex

tasks.

Smaller groups are better suited to coordinating and facilitating the

implementation of complex tasks.

Simple, routine standardized tasks reduce the requirement thatgroup processes be effective in order for the group to perform well.

The research on social facilitation tells us that the performance of

simple, routine tasks tends to be sped up and made more accurate by

the presence of others.


19/25

Group Decision Making vs. Individual Choice

Group Strengths:

Generate more complete information and knowledge

Offer increased diversity of views and greater creativity

Increased acceptance of decisions

Generally more accurate (but not as accurate as the most

accurate group member)

Group Weaknesses:

Time-consuming activity

Conformity pressures in the group

Discussions can be dominated by a few members

A situation of ambiguous responsibility

9-18


20/25

Group Decision Making

Groupthink Situations where group pressures for conformity deter

the group from critically appraising unusual, minority,

or unpopular views

Hinders performance

Groupshift

When discussing a given set of alternatives and arriving

at a solution, group members tend to exaggerate theinitial positions that they hold. This causes a shift to

more conservative or more risky behavior.


21/25

Symptoms: Group members rationalize any resistance to the assumptions

they have made

Members apply direct pressures on those who express doubtsabout shared views or who question the alternative favored by

the majority Members who have doubts or differing points of view keep

silent about misgivings

There appears to be an illusion of unanimity

Minimize Groupthink by:

Reduce the size of the group to 10 or less

Encourage group leaders to be impartial

Appoint a devils advocate

Use exercises on diversity

Groupthink


22/25

Interacting Groups

Typical groups, in which the members interact with each

other face-to-face.

Group Decision-Making Techniques

Electronic Meeting

A meeting in which members interact on computers,allowing for anonymity of comments and aggregation of

votes.


23/25

Nominal Group Technique

A group decision-making method in which individual members meet

face-to-face to pool their judgments in a systematic but independent

fashion.


1. Members meet as a group but, before any discussion takes place,each member independently writes down his or her ideas on theproblem.

2. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to thegroup.

3. Each member takes his or her turn.4. The group now discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them.5. Each group member silently and independently rank-orders the

ideas.6. The idea with the highest aggregate ranking determines the final

decision


24/25

BrainstormingAn idea-generation process that specifically encourages any and

all alternatives, while withholding any criticism of those

alternatives.

The process:

1. The group leader states the problem clearly.

2. Members then free-wheel as many alternatives as they

can in a given length of time.

3. No criticism is allowed, and all the alternatives are recordedfor later discussion and analysis.

4. One idea stimulates others, and group members are

encouraged to think the unusual.



25/25

Evaluating Group Effectiveness

Type of Group

Effectiveness Criteria InteractingBrain-

stormingNominal Electronic

Number and quality of ideas Low Moderate High High

Social Pressure High Low Moderate Low

Money Costs Low Low Low High

Speed Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

Task Orientation Low High High High

Potential for Interpersonal

ConflictHigh Low Moderate Moderate

Commitment to Solution High N/A Moderate Moderate

Development of Group

CohesivenessHigh High Moderate Low

9-24

Organizational Behaviour Group (Robbins) 1

Documents

Transcript of Organizational Behaviour Group (Robbins) 1