10-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

10-1

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

CHAPTER TEN

Groups,Teams, and Groups,Teams, and Their LeadershipTheir Leadership

Groups,Teams, and Groups,Teams, and Their LeadershipTheir Leadership

10-3

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Differences Between Organizations and Groups

• An organization can be so large that most members do not know most of the other people within it.

• Groups are small and immediate enough to impact both feelings and self image.

• People tend to be more psychologically invested with groups to which they belong.

• Certain psychological needs are better satisfied by groups.

10-4

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Six Basic Concepts For Understanding Group Perspective

• Group size

• Stages of group development

• Roles

• Norms

• Communication

• Cohesion

10-5

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Implications Of Group Size

• Leader emergence is partially a function of group size.

• As groups become larger, cliques are more likely to form, and many intergroup conflicts are the result of cliques.

• Group size can affect a leader’s behavioral style.

• Group size affects group effectiveness.

10-6

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Developmental Stages Of Groups

Forming Storming Norming Performing

10-7

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Task Roles In Groups

• Initiating: defining the problem, suggesting activities, assigning tasks.

• Information seeking: asking questions, seeking relevant data or views.

• Information sharing: providing data, offering opinions.

10-8

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Task Roles In Groups, continued

• Summarizing: reviewing and integrating others’ points, checking for common understanding and readiness for action.

• Evaluating: assessing validity of assumptions, quality of information, reasonableness of recommendations.

• Guiding: keeping group on track.

10-9

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Relationship Roles In Groups

• Harmonizing: resolving interpersonal conflicts, reducing tension.

• Encouraging: supporting and praising others, showing appreciation for other's contributions, being warm and friendly.

• Gatekeeping: assuring even participation by all group members, making sure that everyone has a chance to be heard and that no individual dominates.

10-10

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Why Group Cohesion Does Not Always Lead To Higher Performance

• A highly cohesive but unskilled team is still an unskilled team.

• A cohesive group may develop goals that are contrary to the larger organization’s goals.

• Overbounding: groups can become so cohesive that they erect fences and boundaries between themselves and others.

10-11

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Why Group Cohesion Does Not Always Lead To Higher Performance, continued

• Group think: highly cohesive groups often become more concerned with unanimity than in objective appraisals.

• Ollieism: overzealous group members may perform illegal actions because they believe it will please their leaders.

10-12

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Differences Between Groups and Teams

• Team members usually have a stronger sense of identification among themselves than group members do.

• Teams have common goals or tasks.

• Task interdependence typically is greater with teams than with groups.

10-13

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Organizational Shells

OrganizationTASK

at work

Team

Group formation

Industry

BOUNDARY

NORMS

AUTHORITY

EnvironmentEnvironment

10-14

McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2002 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.

Feedback

Feedback F

eedback

Feedback on team effectiveness

Ginnett’s Team Effectiveness Leadership Model

Dre

am

T-1 TaskT-2 CompositionT-3 Norms

Team Design

T-4 Authority

0-1 Reward Systems0-2 Education Systems0-3 Information Systems

Organizational Inputs

0-4 Control System

I-1 Interests/MotivationI-2 Skills/AbilitiesI-3 Values/Attitudes

Individual Inputs

I-4 Interpersonal Behavior

Team Leadership

Industry

P-1 EffortP-2 Knowledge & SkillsP-3 Strategy

Process Criteria

P-4 Group Dynamics

Team EffectivenessOutcome acceptable to

stakeholdersFuture capability of team

Individual satisfaction

Design

Environment

Developm

ent

Self-efficacy Feedback

Material Resources

Feedback