Chapter 8 Case Study 2: Intragroup Trust and Survival: Group - 2

Chapter 8 Case Study 2:
INTRAGROUP TRUST
AND SURVIVAL
Group - 2
22067564 SAKINAH ASHAN
22061721 MAJA MIHAJLOVSKI
20585264 JAYDAN OLIVERIA
22061726 FREYA REES
Slide 1
Copyright © 2017 Pearson Australia (a division of Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd) – 9781488609329, Robbins, Organisational Behaviour 8e
Intragroup Trust & Survival Summary-
 10 British soldiers of different skill, fitness and experience levels undertook a ten-day
training exercise into Low’s Gully, with everyone understanding that for such expeditions:
never split up.
 The fittest 3 were found on day 19, while 3 were found in a village and the 5 remained in a
cave and were found by a helicopter on day 33
 The British team were expecting to work in 2 groups in the harder phases of the decent in
order to defeat the Hong Kong Soldiers
 The group split due to climbing conditions, sickness and monsoon rains which relied back
to blaming Niell’s and Foster’s poor leadership as they decided to take inexperienced
soldiers on the exercise
 However, the group had the same training and had a clear understanding of the roles and
the volunteer commitment to the mission
 Trust issues developed when Niell and Foster ignored soldier’s concerns for health which
caused the divided into subgroups
 The group divided into 4 subgroups as there was no trust in the leader
Slide 2
Intragroup Trust & Survival Advantages
INDIVIDUAL GROUP ORGANISATION
 -Different individual skill  - Mixed abilities in the  -Leadership making

sets group decisions to send less
 -Similarities and  The group members experienced soldiers in
differences within share the common order to keep the
individuals in the group denominator of soldier injured soldiers healthy
 -individual mindsets training, clear roles and  -Problem solving
which can make own volunteer commitment leadership by trying to
decisions to complete to the mission problem solve by
missions to divide into  -lack of trust in leaders focusing on finding the
subgroups causing groups to best fit soldiers for the
make own decisions in job
order to complete
mission successfully
and safely
Slide 3
Intragroup Trust & Survival Advantages
SHORT TERM ADV LONG TERM ADV
 Assists in setting groups direction In phase  Groups are able to be aware of time and
1 deadlines
 Helps the group from trust
 Opens communication channels between

individuals and leaders
 Allows individuals to understand each other  Individuals in the group are experiencing the
experiences building long term trust
 - Sets group direction

 Phase 2 the group executes new plans in a
transition period in order to build growth in the
group
Slide 4
Intragroup Trust & Survival Disadvantages
INDIVIDUAL GROUP ORGANISATION
 Getting sick  Trust issues  No leadership

 Becoming injured  Low level of skills
 Malnutrition communication  Lack of control
 Lead to  Lack of preparation
overconfidence  Trust issues
 Leaders ignorance
Slide 5
Intragroup Trust & Survival Disadvantages
SHORT TERM DISADV LONG TERM DISADV
Individual:  Train soldiers for more than just survival
Listen to the golden rule “never split up’, skills (etc. teamwork)
Accurate training for soldiers, e.g., climbing  Transition stage should have included
training, the leaders' decisions
- First meeting of the group should be more
specific
Slide 6
Activity
Trust and communication activity and discussion
In 2 groups, complete one activity:
 Activity 1: trust fall

 Activity 2: grab a hand
Slide 7
Activity's Summary
Grab a hand activity Trust fall activity

Advantages Disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages
Great for developing Trust cannot be built Builds trust Creates fear from lack of
trust instantly trust
Great for developing Too much Opens communication Lack of communication
teamwork micromanagement channels can cause anxiety
Shows different Strong personas
leadership traits cause conflict
in everyone
Discussion
Trust fall: Did you trust the person catching you? And explain.
Grab a hand: How did you communicate to overcome the difficulty/challenge?
Slide 8
Punctuated equilibrium model
Stage 1: A meeting that sets up
group's direction
Stage 2: inertia and slow

progress
Stage 3: transition point when

the group has used up half of its
time
Stage 4: major change is made,

and revised direction is set
Stage 5:sedcond stage of

inertia
Stage 6: accelerated activity

leading up to deadline
(Robbins et al. 2020)
Slide 9
Summary
Advantages of the model
Its discovery can help business understand how individuals work in a group
and help to manage them in a productive way
It can help individuals understand what stage they are up to in their group
work
The negative impact that it will have been that it does not account for the
emotions and characteristics of an individual within a group
All business should implement this model to better understand how
individuals work in a group and what it would look like from a internal as well
as external position.
Slide 10
References
Connaughton, RM 1996 Descent into Chaos: The doomed expedition to Low’s Gully, UK: Brassey’s.
Hansen, MT 2009, 'When Internal Collaboration is bad for your company' Harvard Business Review, 24 April, viewed
6th April 2023, < https://hbr.org/2009/04/when-internal-collaboration-is-bad-for-your-company>.
Kahneman, D, Lovallo, D, Sibony O 2011, ' The Big Idea: Before You Make That Big Decision', Harvard
Business Review, 13 June, viewed 6th April 2023, <
https://hbr.org/2011/06/the-big-idea-before-you-make-that-big-decision>.
Korsgaard, MA, Brower HH &. Lester, SW 2014 ‘It isn’t always mutual: a critical review of dyadic trust’, Journal
of Management, vol. 41, no. 1, 2014, pp. 47–70; DO: 10.1177/0149206314547521
Neill R & Foster R,1995 SOS: The Story Behind the Army Expedition to Borneo’s Death Valley, London: Century.
Priem, R and Nystrom, P, J 2011, ‘Exploring the Dynamics of Workgroup Fracture: Common Ground, Trust-With-
Trepidation, and Warranted Distrus’, Journal of Management, vol 40, no 3, pp. 764-795
Robbins, SP, Judge, TA, Edwards, E, Sandiford, P, Fitzgerald, M, & Hunt, J 2020, Organisational Behaviour, Pearson
Australia, Melbourne Victoria.
Slide 11

Chapter 8 Case Study 2: Intragroup Trust and Survival: Group - 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Chapter 8 Case Study 2: Intragroup Trust and Survival: Group - 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 8 Case Study 2:

 -Different individual skill  - Mixed abilities in the  -Leadership making

 Helps the group from trust

 Opens communication channels between

 - Sets group direction

 Getting sick  Trust issues  No leadership

 Activity 1: trust fall

Grab a hand activity Trust fall activity

Stage 2: inertia and slow

Stage 3: transition point when

Stage 4: major change is made,

Stage 5:sedcond stage of

Stage 6: accelerated activity

(Robbins et al. 2020)

You might also like