Group Dynamics & Industrial Psychology Unit-1

Definition of Group Group is defined as minimum two or more than two individuals who come together to complete particular task(s) usually towards achievement of goal(s). The group may be of two types: - informal group and - formal groups

The behavior of individuals in a group may get modified to certain extent as compared their behavior when they are independent of the group. This is due to the interactions between the members of the group and their influence on each other. Definition of Group Dynamics Group dynamics is the study of groups. t!s an important sub"ect of organi#ational behavior ($%)& particularly for the organi#ational groups. t!s the study of group formation& structure& interaction ' behavior ' process. (tudy of the group processes forms the most important core sub"ect of the studies while looking at the group functioning. )ue to this reason& many a time& people understand group dynamics and group process as one and the same. Group Formation Why Are Groups Formed? Companionship * groups provide members to simply be in the company of other people. Survival and security * +rom a historic or evolutionary perspective our ancestors would partake in group experiences for hunting and defense.

ffiliation and status * membership into various groups can provide individuals with certain socials status! or security. Po!er and control* with group membership comes the opportunity for leadership roles, individuals who feel they need to exert their power and opinions over others can have such experiences within group settings. chievement * groups have the capability to achieve more than individuals acting alone. ndividuals sharing common sentiments& purpose and activities start interacting and form a group. -hen individuals perceive that they can expect beneficial exchanges explicitly or implicitly by forming the group& they do so and become part of the group. -hen individuals believe that they can get an identity& belongingness& self-esteem or prestige by affiliating to a particular or significant or prominent group& they do so.

%ruce Tuckman gave a five stage framework for formation and development of groups in ./01s. These five stages are given below: 1" Forming# )ue to any one of the reasons enunciated earlier& group gets formed.

2ormally& the group gets formed with an incomplete idea of its goals or purposes. (o& at the beginning of formation& there is some confusion and uncertainty. 3eadership of the group and the roles and tasks to be undertaken by the group do not emerge clearly. Thus& forming is an induction process through which members get to know each other and share expectations from the group. 4embers gradually learn the purpose of the group and the guidelines to be followed. +orming stage should not be rushed because trust and openness have yet to develop. These feelings strengthen in later stages of development.

$" Storming#

n this stage& the group is likely to experience the highest level of disagreement and conflict as members may voice concerns and criticism. 4embers often 5uestion and challenge group goals. They also struggle for power or leadership. f members can ultimately achieve understanding and cohesiveness through collaboration and resolution& the group may continue as a group. $therwise& the group may disband. 6owever& if it still continues& it may remain ineffective and may not make progress to the subse5uent stages.

%" &orming#

n this stage& the members start recogni#ing their individual differences and also their shared expectations. 4embers may begin to develop a feeling of group identity and group harmony. 7ooperative efforts may begin. 8oles and responsibilities among members may get decided. They may also decide on how to evaluate progress of the group.

'" Performing#

9t performing stage& group might have achieved maturity and there will be greater degree of harmony among its members. There is more mutual acceptance among the members now. 7onflict can be managed and resolved more amicably through collaborative processes. )ecisions making takes place more on rational basis aimed at achieving goals rather than highlighting the emotional issues.

(" d)ourning#

9ll groups do not experience this stage at all. 4any groups remain permanent. (ome groups that complete their tasks and goals may decide on disbanding the group. This stage is characteri#ed by the feelings of sadness normally associated with closure of any group and separation of the members.

Unit-$

I&*+,G,-UP .+/ 0I-U,

ntergroup behavior& or the way groups interact with other groups& is best examined in terms of the fre5uency and interaction type the groups engage in. Thomas (./:0) elaborated on this concept by noting the nature of intergroup interactions depends largely on the degree to which groups must interact in order to achieve their goals& and the degree of compatibility between the goals of different groups.

ccommodation interaction is based on groups having similar goals and taking part in minimal to moderate mutual concession and cooperation to achieve them. voidance interaction is found between groups where there are different or conflicting goals and even minimal collaboration is not warranted. %oth of these interactions are viewed as having no to low impact on successfully achieving each group!s goals. Colla1oration interaction is necessary when the goals of two groups are largely compatible and partnership is re5uired for successful goal accomplishment. Competition interaction usually occurs when two groups must interact to meet specific goals that are vastly incompatible. Compromise interaction occurs when two groups have a moderate need to interact to meet specific goals which are moderately compatible. n this type of interaction& the two groups may work together on a semi-regular basis to ensure they are on track to meet the relevant aspects of their overlapping goals. ntergroup behaviour is influenced by factors beyond interaction types. ;xamples of these include nterdependence& $rgani#ational 7ulture& <ast 6istory& and $rgani#ational (ocial 2etworks. Interdependence is the degree to which group depend on each other and is determined by the type of group tasks (i.e.& simple versus complex)& organi#ation structure& and the organi#ational authority system). nterdependence may occur in one of three common forms:
o

Pooled interdependence# The combined efforts of largely separate groups positively contribute to the organi#ation. Se2uential interdependence# The effort or output of one group is used as the input for another group. ,eciprocal interdependence# 9 series of mutual exchanges between groups& re5uiring a high degree of continuous interactions.

-rgani3ational culture& its shared norms& values& and power structure& will often dictate the fre5uency and degree to which intergroup interactions and collaborations occur. Past history !ith intergroup relationships also impact interdependence behaviour. The influence of this factor is directly connected to the past interaction experience between groups. -hether the interaction was positive or negative& new group members may be influenced in the direction of the group!s previous experience.

Social net!or4s in organi3ations are another vital factor when considering intergroup behaviour. 7ordial individual group member interaction is believed to greatly impact the 5uality of intergroup relationships.

I&*+,G,-UP C-&F5IC*S
ntergroup conflict may be caused by competition for resources& goal incompatibility& time incompatibility& and contentious influence tactics. There are activities that organi#ations can participate in to reduce or prevent competition between groups.

,esources# 8esources (e.g.& budgets& personnel& physical space) are generally limited within organi#ations so that competition for resources between groups is often unavoidable. Goal Incompati1ility# Goal incompatibility occurs when the goals of two or more groups are in direct opposition such that one group will achieve its goal while the other group(s) will be unable to meet the goal. Goal incompatibility may be distinguished between real goal incompatibility and perceived goal incompatibility. *ime Incompati1ility# -ork groups perform different tasks& have different goals& and interact with different customers such that groups will have different time frames or deadlines in which they operate. Contentious Influence *actics# 7ontentious influence tactics (e.g.& threats& demands& and other negative behaviours) may be used to attempt to influence others from another group creating cycles of retaliation and influencing the opinions of those within their own group (e.g.& creating bad reputations).

Conse2uences of intergroup conflict

;ffects related to conflict between groups may be either negative or positive.

Group members! perceptions of one another change in a negative manner where a distinction is made between =in-group> and =out-group>. 4embers of groups in conflict develop an =us versus them> mentality and view members of the other group as fundamentally different from themselves but similar to each other. Group members become more cohesive to compete against a =common enemy>. ?uality of intergroup interactions (e.g.& communication) may decline among groups in conflict& which in turn may decrease the 5uality of work. 2egative perceptions of the other group may be transferred to incoming group members. 7onflict may create discrepancies between the goals of the group and the goals of the organi#ation.

,+S-5U*I-& -F I&*+,G,-UP ,+5 *I-&S

Superordinate goals are goals that are approved by all groups and that may re5uire the groups to interact in a cooperative manner to achieve the goals (e.g.& produce a product& prepare a report&

and complete a service to customers). (uperordinate goals may also be used to create a =common enemy> that increases the cohesion among group members to defeat the enemy. &egotiation may facilitate communication of issues causing conflict between groups so that groups can form a resolution that is suitable to members within both groups. =<rincipled negotiation> refers to one style of negotiation so that members attempt to problem-solve until a resolution between groups is reached rather than focusing on which their individual positions. (+ischer and @ry& ./A.) 6em1er e7changes allow group members to exchange roles with those of the other group members. These exchanges are intended to provide a new perspective. Intergroup *eam Development may be used to improve relations for members within the same group or between groups. $ne intervention developed by %lake& (hephard& and 4outon (./0B) has members of both groups generate one list about how the group perceives the other group and one list that describes how they think the other group will describe them, the lists are then shared with both groups to reduce misperceptions. ,educing the need for intergroup interaction may be necessary for work groups that cannot work well together. 9 =coordinating group> may be used as an intermediary between groups so that each group would communicate through the =coordinating group>. $rgani#ations may create slack resources by adding additional inventory so that groups do not have to interact as fre5uently. $rgani#ations may also reduce task interdependence between those groups that function under different time frames and deadlines (i.e.& physically separate the groups). The resource allocation process should 1e fair so that all groups have access to the process and political considerations between groups are minimi#ed. $rgani#ations should first reexamine the process to determine that groups have the resources needed to be effective.

Unit-'
The information process in an organi#ation is labyrinthine and without some overall map to guide our steps in studying them we should soon be lost in a mass of unstructured detail. (uch maps are provided by general frameworks that seek to sharpen important distinctions in the kinds of information that support managerial decisions. 9 number of such frameworks which& in our opinion& provide the most insight from a pragmatic standpoint are discussed below. ,o1ert nthony has delineated a framework which distinguishes between the different types of planning and control process that typically occur in organi#ations. 6is basic thesis is that thin4ing of planning and control as t!o separate and homogeneous activities in an organi3ation is not only meaningless 1ut positively dysfunctional . nstead of this segmentation of management planning and control activities into two categories of planning and control& 9nthony suggested that the area of management planning and control be segmented into three categories& resisting the =natural temptation to use as the two main divisions>& i.e.: C planning (roughly& deciding what to do& and
control (roughly), assuring that desired results are obtained. The three categories suggested by Anthony are:

i) Strategic Planning ii) Management Control

iii) $perational 7ontrol nthony& describes planning and control activities as so closely inter-linked that to make a separation of these activities is not only undesirable but would make them meaningless. nstead& according to him& it makes much more conceptual and practical sense to link together planning and control activities which are similar and inter-twined. nthony8s definition of these three sub-species of planning and control are: a) Strategic Planning is the process of deciding on ob"ectives of the organisation& on changes in these ob"ectives& on the resources used to attain these ob"ectives& and on the policies that are to govern the ac5uisition& use and disposition of these resources. b) 6anagement Control is the process by which managers assure that these resources are obtained and used effectively and efficiently in the accomplishment of the organisation!s ob"ectives. c) -perational Control is the process of assuring that specific tasks are carried out effectively and efficiently.

/yper competition and the &e! 9 Ss Frame!or4 )iscussions of hypercompetition0 take a perspective different from the previous models. Those models focus on creating and sustaining competitive advantage& whereas hyper competition models suggest that the speed and aggressiveness of the moves and countermoves in any given market create an environment in which advantages are =rapidly created and eroded.>: This perspective works from the following assumptions: C ;very advantage is eroded. 9dvantages only last until competitors have duplicated or outmaneuvered them. $nce an advantage is no longer an advantage& it becomes a cost of doing business. C (ustaining an advantage can be a deadly distraction. (ome companies can extend their advantages and continue to en"oy the benefits& but sustaining an advantage can take attention away from developing new ones. C The goal of advantage should be disruption& not sustainability. 9 company seeks to stay one step ahead through a series of temporary advantages that erode competitors! positions& rather than by creating a sustainable position in the marketplace. C nitiatives are achieved with a series of small steps. 7ompetitive cycles are shorter now& and new advantages must be achieved 5uickly. 7ompanies focus on creating the next advantage before the benefits of the current advantage erode. pproach Definition Superior sta4eholder satisfaction @nderstanding how to maximi#e customer

Strategic soothsaying Positioning for speed Positioning for surprise

Shifting the rules of competition Signaling strategic intent

Simultaneous thrusts

and

se2uential

satisfaction by adding value strategically. (eeking out new knowledge that can predict or create new windows of opportunity. <reparing the organi#ation to react as 5uickly as possible. <reparing the organi#ation to respond to the marketplace in a manner that will surprise competitors +inding new ways to serve customers which transform the industry. 7ommunicating the intended actions of a company& in order to stall responses by competitors. strategic Taking a series of steps designed to stun and confuse competitor.

6easurement of individual differences

Industrial and organi3ational psychology (also known as I/O psychology& work psychology& or personnel psychology) is the scientific study of employees& workplaces& and organi#ations. ndustrial and organi#ational psychologists contribute to an organi#ationDs success by improving the performance and well-being of its people. 9n E$ psychologist researches and identifies how behaviors and attitudes can be improved through hiring practices& training programs& and feedback systems. E$ psychologists also help organi#ations transition among periods of change and development. ndustrial and organi#ational psychology is related to the concepts of organi#ational behavior and human capital. 9n applied science& *$ psychology is represented by )ivision .B of the 9merican <sychological 9ssociation& known formally as the (ociety for ndustrial and $rgani#ational <sychology (( $<).

6easurement of intelligence
<ersonality& ndividual )ifferences and ntelligence& Fnd ;dition& offers accessible and in-depth coverage of classic and contemporary issues& and actively encourages students to develop skills in critical analysis. 9ll chapters have been extensively revised to include the latest research. This new edition includes four new chapters& covering 6ealth <sychology& -ellbeing and <ersonality )isorders& 7ontemporary deas and )ebates in <ersonality& and <sychometric Testing. The book includes a range of pedagogical features to engage students& stimulate interest and support learning at different levels. n addition& the book is supported by a fantastic companion website which includes a range of exam and essay 5uestions to allow students to consolidate their understanding& web links and commentary on online "ournals to help students better understand the research process in the field& and three chapters are available exclusively online: 9cademic 9rgument and Thinking& (tatistical Terms& and 8esearch ;thics.

Unit-(

n the law of contracts& frustration of purpose is a defense to enforcement of the contract. +rustration of purpose occurs when an unforeseen event undermines a partyDs principal purpose for entering into a contract& and both parties knew of this principal purpose at the time the contract was made. )espite fre5uently arising as a result of government action& any third party (or even nature) can frustrate a contracting partyDs primary purpose for entering into the contract. This concept is also called commercial frustration.