Why It Matters: Group Dynamics

Why learn about group dynamics within organizations?

Let’s first look to history to see why this so important.
One day, Clarence Avery, lead developer of the assembly line; Peter Martin, head of
assembly; and Charles Sorenson, Martin’s assistant, got together with their CEO, Mr. Henry
Ford, to talk about the efficiency of automotive assembly and how, if they did some group
work and threw some suggestions on the table, they might be able to make their product
affordable to their employees.

They thought about how, if they refined their production a little bit, they could lower
the cost of automobile production. If they lowered the cost of production, they could
lower the cost of the automobile itself! And if they paid their employees more, their
employees could afford to buy their product. Then, they would sell more
automobiles.

Oh, and then, they decided to give employees two days off rather than just one. That
way they had time to enjoy their automobiles, and Ford Motor Company would
attract the best workers.

When the right people get together in a group, and that group is managed well, an
organization stands to profit—and sometimes the world is changed and the
weekend, as we know it today, is invented.

The day an entrepreneur decides to start a company, he’s an individual out there
making deals, making decisions and maybe even changing the world. The day he
hires others into his company, he’s suddenly dealing with groups and group
dynamics. Two can be a crowd, or two heads can be better than one, and that all
depends on a manager’s understanding of how groups work and how to best use
them to create solutions for an organization.

Henry Ford knew how to motivate and even agitate his team toward greatness. What
if he hadn’t understood the potential of groups? Where would we be today?

Group Dynamics

What you’ll learn to do: Explain and explore the tension between

individual versus groups and group dynamics in organizational life.
When it comes to completing work, managing projects and achieving goals, managers have
many choices on how they manage the people they lead. They can deal with each of their
subordinates individually, assigning individual goals and allowing them to work alone.
Conversely, managers can look at their subordinates as one large group, or a subset of
smaller groups, and set them on a course of solving organizational problems and achieving
objectives.
What are the pros and cons of choosing to assemble a group? And how does it compare to
assigning an issue to a single subordinate?

Types of Groups

If you went to high school, then you already know more about groups than you think!
Were you one of the cool kids? One of the brainy, studious ones? Did you join the
chess club? French club? The football team? All of these, the clubs and cliques you
were a part of, and the ones you weren’t, are groups. And they can be classified in a
number of ways. Let’s talk about the types of groups one might encounter, in life and
especially in the workplace.

A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have
come together to achieve a particular objective. Groups are either formal or informal. A
formal group is a designated work group, one that is defined by an organization based on its
hierarchical structure, with designated tasks related to its function. In the workplace, that
might be the finance group or the human resources group.

Formal groups are relatively permanent and usually work under a single supervisor,
although the structure of the formal group may vary. For example, the finance group
works under the chief financial officer at an organization. There may be groups within
the finance group, like the accounts payable group and the treasury group, each with
their own supervisor as well.

Task forces and committees are also formal groups, because they’ve been created
with formal authority within an organization. Task forces are usually temporary and
set up for a particular purpose, while committees can be more permanent in nature,
like a planning committee or a finance committee, and can be an integral part of an
organization’s operation.

An informal group is one that’s not organizationally determined or influenced and

usually formed by the members themselves in response to the need for social
contact. For instance, your workplace might have a group of people who get together
during the lunch hour to knit and help each other with yarn projects, or a group that is
drawn together by cultural similarities and wants to introduce the rest of the
organization to their traditions.

Informal groups are important in that they exist outside the formal hierarchy of an
organization but are the structure of personal and social interactions that managers
are wise to respect and understand. Employees motivate one another, informally
(and formally) train one another and support one another in times of stress by
providing guidance and sharing burdens. In fact, if one employee in an informal
group is subject to an action by the organization that the others see as unfair, strikes
can happen until that situation is corrected.

Within the group categories of formal and informal, there are sub-classifications:

 Command group. This is a formal group, determined by the

organization’s hierarchal chart and composed of the individuals that
 report to a particular manager. For instance, the manager of training has
a command group of his employees, the training group.
 Task group. This is also a type of formal group, and the term is used to
describe those groups that have been brought together to complete a
task. This does not mean, though, that it’s just a group of people
reporting to a single supervisor. The training group, used in the last
example, is not the same as the task group that provides onboarding
training for a new employee. The training department might provide the
outline for how a new employee is brought into the company, but an
onboarding task group would include that employee’s manager, an IT
manager who equips the new employee with a computer and phone,
and so on.
 Interest group. An interest group is usually informal, and is a group of
people who band together to attain a specific objective with which each
member is concerned. Within an organization, this might be a group of
people who come together to demand better working conditions or a
better employee evaluation process. Outside of an organization, this
term is frequently used in political situations to describe groups that give
a point of view a voice. This includes groups like the National Rifle
Association, the AFL-CIO and the NAACP.
 Friendship group. These are groups of people who have come
together because they share common ideals, common interests or other
similarities, like age or ethnic background.

People join groups for a number of reasons. They might be looking for affiliation, a fulfilment
of social needs. Groups also add to an individual’s sense of security, status or self-esteem.
Or perhaps a goal is easier to accomplish if a group of people concentrate on achieving it,
pooling their talents and knowledge. Or, the sheer size of the group might provide the power
and influence needed to accomplish the goal.

Groups are an inevitability in the workplace. Understanding how and why they come
together is the first step in understanding how they function and how they can
function well. However, there are plenty of arguments out there for individual work,
and understanding the individual’s need to succeed in the workplace independent of
others. Which is right? We’ll discuss that next.

Group Development
The story of every feel-good sports movie—from The Bad News
Bears to Hoosiers to Miracle to The Mighty Ducks—is one about a group that came
together clumsily and without much hope and went on to win big. As moviegoers, we
sit in the darkened theatre and root them on as they meet, fight, cry, learn about
each other, and finally gain an understanding of how to work well as a single unit.
And when we think all hope is lost, and then that last goal/point/home run is
scored . . . well, pass the tissues, please.

Now, you may think, “Those aren’t good movies. They’re all the same!” And you’d be
right. But it’s not because screenwriters set out to plagiarize a good idea. It’s
because the Bad News Bears, the Hoosiers, the USA Hockey players and yes, even
the Mighty Ducks, went through all the normal stages of group development, and
their group development is the basis for their story.

Groups generally proceed through a sequence during their evolution, and that
sequence is called the five-stage model.

In the pre-stage, you have a group of people who have never met and probably do
not yet know they’re going to be a group.

But the minute they meet, either formally or informally, the members start to go
through the forming stage. There’s a whole lot of uncertainty in the forming stage.
The members of the group don’t necessarily know the group’s purpose, who their
leader is, or what the structure of the group is.

The storming stage is one of intragroup conflict. Members are resistant to the

constraints the group imposes on them individually. The group may attempt tasks
and fail. There is likely even conflict over who’s the leader of the group.

All of a sudden, close relationships will start to develop between the group members,
and a cohesive bond may start to form. A sense of camaraderie and purpose starts
to develop. This is the norming stage. During the norming stage, the group will
determine a correct set of behaviors that are expected of every group member, and
group structure will solidify.

The fourth stage is performing. The structure of the group is fully accepted at this
stage, and the group members are getting to know each other well, understanding
how to work together to complete the task at hand. They are fully functional.

A permanent group will continue in the performing stage and stop there, but a
temporary group, like a task force or a temporary committee, may proceed on to
the adjourning stage. In the adjourning stage, the group moves their focus from
performing to wrapping up tasks. Members bask in the accomplishments of the
group, or become depressed over the loss of camaraderie and friendship they found
within the group.

A scenario:

Itzel has just been made the manager of newly formed a

small social media team, where she supervises four
individuals: Jordan, Carla, Nicole, and Mircea.
Let's take a look at Itzel and her team as they progress
through the five stages of group development.
When the team all meets for the first time, they’re not sure
what direction their team will go, beyond the fact that they’ve
been tasked to create a social media strategy to increase
their company’s social media engagement.
Itzel’s team is in the forming stage. They’ve met each other,
they’ve just figured out why they’re on this team, but they’ve
got a long way to go yet.

After taking stock of the company’s current social media

strategy, Itzel has a kick-off meeting, where she critiques
the current strategy, in particular the usage of Twitter and
Instagram. This makes Jordan, who had been responsible
for some of the previous social media initiatives, upset.
Itzel goes on to explains her planned initiatives. However,
Carla, whose background is in marketing, and was brought
on the team for a unique perspective, is unfamiliar with a lot
of the tools and terms Itzel talks about. This leaves Carla
frustrated.

The social media team has entered the storming stage.

Itzel speaks with her supervisor and learns more about her
team. She offers training and resources to any individuals
who feel out of their depth, and she creates an open door
policy, so her team feels free to come in and share their
ideas with her.
Itzel also establishes weekly team brainstorming sessions,
so everyone has the chance to share and develop their
ideas with the group.