GROUP DYNAMICS (PA)

The more cohesive the group, the greater its:

PRODUCTIVITY AND EFFICIENCY
GROUP BEHAVIOR, TEAMS, AND
CONFLICT (DQ)
And the more cohesive the group, the greater its:
Group is two (2) or more individuals who DECISION QUALITY
perceive themselves as a group and interact in
some ways. (MS)
The more cohesive the group, the greater its:
GORDON (2001) – according to him, for a MEMBER SATISFACTION
collection of people to be called as group, the
following criteria must be met; (MI)
The more cohesive the group, the greater it’s;
(1) The members of the group must see MEMBER INTERACTION
themselves as a unit.
(2) The group must provide rewards to its (EC)
members; The more cohesive the group, the greater its:
(3) Anything that happens to one member of EMPLOYEE COURTESY
the group affects every other member; and
(4) Members of the group must share a
common goal. GROUP HOMOSEXUALITY – is the extent to
which members of the group are similar to one
REASONS FOR JOINING GROUPS another.

1. Assignment HOMOGENOUS GROUP – contains members who

2. Physical Proximity are similar in some or most ways.
3. Affiliation
4. Identification HETEROGENOUS GROUP – contains members
5. Emotional Support who are more different than alike.
6. Assistance or Help
7. Common Interests
8. Common Goals

FACTORS AFFECTING GROUP PERFORMANCE

1. Cohesiveness
2. Group Ability and Confidence
3. Personality of the group
4. Communication Structure
5. Group Roles
6. Individual Dominance

(BEALE, COHEN, BURKE, & MCLENDON, 2003) STABILITY OF MEMBERSHIP

According to them, Group Cohesiveness The greater the stability, the greater the
is the extent to which group members like and cohesiveness.
trust one another, are committed to
accomplishing a team goal, and share a feeling of - Group Isolation
group pride. - Outside Pressure
Psychological Reactance Phenomenon GROUP ROLES
When someone is trying to intentionally influence
us to make some particular action, we often react (TOR) Task-Oriented Roles
the opposite. Involve behaviors such as offering new ideas,
coordinating activities, and finding new
GROUP SIZE information
The smaller the group size, the greater the
cohesiveness. (SOR) Social-Oriented Roles
Involve encouraging cohesiveness and
participation.

(IR) Individual Role

Includes blocking group activities, calling
attention to oneself, and avoiding group
interaction.

PRESENCE OF OTHERS: Social

Facilitation & Inhibition
Social Facilitation – involves positive effects of
the presence of others on an individual’s
behavior.

TYPES OF TASK Social Inhibition – involves negative effects on

(1) Additive task – group performance is the presence of others on an individual’s
equal to the sum of performances by each behavior.
group member. AT
(2) Conjunctive Task – group’s performance
depends on the least effective group AUDIENCE EFFECTS
member. CT This phenomenon takes place when a group of
(3) Disjunctive Task – group performance is people passively watch an individual.
based on the most talented group member.
DT

- Group Status
- Group Ability & Confidence
- Personality Structure

- Communication Structure

Coaction – the effect on behavior when two (2) or

more people are performing the same task in the
presence of one another.
EFFECTS OF SOCIAL FACILITATION INDIVIDUAL DOMINANCE

Mere presence of others naturally produces

arousal or increase in energy.

Comparison is when coacting audience provides

a means of comparison.

Evaluation Apprehension is hypothesized that

judgement by others causes the differential
effects of social facilitation.
(JANIS, 1972) GROUPTHINK
Distracting states that the presence of others
It occurs when a group makes faulty decisions
causes distraction to the individual who is trying
because group pressures lead to a deterioration
to perform a task.
of “mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral
judgment”.
SOCIAL LOAFING THEORY
This theory considers the effect on individual Group that are affected by groupthink ignore
performance when people work together on a task. alternatives and tend to take irrational actions
that dehumanize other groups.

Groupthink can be reduced in several ways:

(1) The group leader should not state his
decisions until late in the decision-making
process.
(2) The leader should promote open
discussion.
(3) Create subgroups to increase
disagreement.
(4) Devils advocate

Individual versus Group Performance

Free-rider Theory
Postulates that when things are going well, a (1) Nominal Group – when several people
group member realizes that his effort is not individually work on a problem but do not
necessary and thus, does not work hard as he interact.
would if her were alone. (2) Interacting Group – when several
individuals interact to solve a problem.

Sucker Effect Theory TEAMS

Hypothesized that social loafing occurs when a
Team works best in situation which:
member of the group notices that other group
(1) Job requires high level of employee
members are not working hard and thus are
interaction
“playing him for a sucker”
(2) A team approach will simplify a job
(3) A team can do something an individual
cannot.
(4) There is time to create a team and properly
train team members.
WORK TEAM PARALLEL TEAMS
It is the collection of 3 or more individuals who - Also called “cross-functional teams” which
interact intensively to provide an organization consists of representatives from various
product, plan, decision, or service. departments (functions) within an
organization.
Also consists of group of employees who manage
themselves, assign jobs, plan, and schedule work, PROJECT TEAMS
make work-related decisions, and solve work- - Are formed to produce one-time output
related problems. such as creating new products, installing
new software, or hiring a new employee.
FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN
MANAGEMENT TEAMS
FORMING A TEAM (6) - Coordinates, manage, advise, and direct
employees and teams.
1. Identification
2. Interdependence How to Develop Teams?
3. Power Differentiation (treating others as
equal) (1) Forming
4. Conflict Management Tactic (2) Storming
5. Negotiation Process (3) Norming
6. Social Distance (Casualness) (4) Performing

Why teams don’t always work?

TYPES OF TEAMS
Teams differ on 2 Major characteristics: 1. The team is not a team
(1) Temporal Duration – ad hoc versus 2. Excessive meeting requirements
ongoing 3. Lack of empowerment
(2) Product Type – project versus production 4. Lack of skill
5. Distrust of the team process
6. Unclear objectives

TRADITIONAL APPROACH, TEAM APPROACH

II. GROUP CONFLICT (7) Compromising style – the use of this style
adopts the give and take tactics that enable
each side to get some of what it wants but
Conflict is the psychological and behavioral not everything it wants.
reaction to a perception that another person is
either;

1. keeping you from reaching your goal.

2. Taking away your right to behave in a
particular way and or
3. Violating the expectancies of a
relationship

3 TYPES OF CONFLICT
Least Acceptable Result (LAR) – lowest
- Interpersonal conflict settlement the person is willing to accept, must be
- Individual-group conflict realistic to accept a person’s needs.
- Group-group conflict Maximum Supportable Position (MSP) – the
best possible settlements that can ask for, still a
reasonably support facts and logic.
6 CAUSES OF CONFLICT

- Competition for resources

- Task independence BATNA – Best Alternative to a
- Jurisdictional ambiguity Negotiated Agreement
- Communication barrier - it is the best alternative that negotiators have if
- Personality they can’t reach an agreement.
- Beliefs
Resolving Conflicts
CONFLICT STYLES
1. Prior to conflict occurring
“Every individual has its unique style in facing
2. When conflict first occur
conflicts…”
3. Third party intervention
(1) Avoiding style – is the tendency of the
individual to ignore the conflict and hope
MEDIATION – a neutral third party is asked to
it will resolve itself.
help both parties reach mutually agreed solutions
(2) Triangling – occurs when an employee
to conflict.
discusses the conflict with a third party,
such as a friend or supervisor.
ARBITRATION – is when a third party listens to
(3) Accomodating style – refers to the
both sides’ arguments and then makes a decision.
approach when a person is so intent on
settling a conflict that he gives in and risks
hurting himself.
(4) Forcing style – states that a person
handles conflict in win-lose fashion and END OF POWERPOINT #1
does what it takes to win, with little regard
for the other person.
(5) Winning at all cost – occurs when a
person regards himself as correct and the
other person is regarded as the enemy
who side is incorrect.
(6) Collaborating style – states that the
individual wants to win but also wants to
see the other person win.
PPT #2 Lewin, Lippit, and White (1939) studied the
influences on groups and group members of

The Field of Group different leadership patterns. Group of 10 and 11

years old children met regularly for several weeks

Dynamics (Evolution) under the leadership of an adults, who behaved in

1 of 3 ways; democractically, autocratically, or in
a laissez-faire manner. The effects were large and
dramatic, were severe forms of scapegoating
The earliest existing philosophical literature occurred in the autocratic groups, and at the end
contains a great deal of wisdom about nature of of the experiments the children in some of those
groups. Although basic assumptions that guide groups destroyed the things they had
the field of group dynamics were discusses from constructed., important issues could be studied.
the 16th century through the 19th century.
FRENCH (1914)
The Field of Group Dynamics is strictly a 20th - Conducted experiments on the effects of
century development. fear and frustration on organized versus
unorganized groups.
In 1900s, a number of psychologists investigated
the effects of having several persons take part BAVELAS (1942)
simultaneously in a variety of standard - Conducted an experiment to determine
psychological experiments to see if an whether the behavior of leaders of youth
individual’s normal solitary performance groups could be significantly modified
occurred when others were present. (Allport, through training.
1924; Moede, 1920)
LEWIN, RADKE, AND OTHERS (1947)
A related line of research compared the - Conducted a number of experiments on
performance of individuals and groups to group decision as a means of changing
determine which were more productive. (Gordon, eating habits related to wartime food
1924; Shaw, 1932; Watson, 1928) shortages.

End of 1930s, a rapid advance in the field took LEWIN, FRENCH, AND MARROW (1957)
place, due to largely to the efforts of 3 - Explored group-decision procedures as a
sociologists. means of improving industrial production.

Sherif (1936) studied the impacts of group

norms on perception of an ambiguous stimulus.
He demonstrated that judgements made by In the 1940s, the rise of dictatorship in Europe,
individuals were influenced by the judgements of and the 2nd World War, the most Americans were
their fellow group members. worried about the fate of their country and the
future of democracy. There was a general
Newcomb (1943) conducted field study agreement that a better understanding was
investigating the impact of social norms needed of how democratic organization could be
concerning political issues on the students of made to function more effectively.
Benington College, documented how the
interaction of students changes their attitudes so The field of Group Dynamics was thought to have
that they become more congruent with the a significant potential for improving democracy.
prevailing norms of the peer group. The health of a democratic society was seen as
depending on the effectiveness of its component
W.F. Whyte (1937) moved into one of the slums groups. Strengthening the family, the community,
of Boston and began a 3 ½ years study of social and the multitude of groups without our society
clubs, political organizations, and racketeering. was viewed as the primary means of ensuring
He reported a vivid detail on the great vitality of our democracy.
significance of the structure, culture, and
functioning of the Norton Street Gang and the
Italian Community Club.
The drive to strengthen democracy by using the - Taught at the Stanford University, Cornell,
scientific method to strengthen groups resulted in and IOWA Universities
2 movements within psychology; - Became Director of Research Center for
Group Dynamics at Massachusetts
(1) Scientific study of group dynamics – to Institute of Technology in 1944
conduct studies of discussion, group - He studied the problems of motivation of
productivity, attitude change and individuals and groups.
leadership, in strengthening democracy. - He did research on child development and
(2) Deriving methods for training – to train personality characteristics
group leaders and members in the social - He has undertaken the type of investigation
skills they would need in order to promote known as “Action Research”
the effective functioning of democratic - The researchers at MIT led him to the
groups. formulation of his FIELD THEORY.
- He stressed the importance of applying
existing knowledge to the training of
WHO IS KURT LEWIN? leaders and members in order to promote
effective functioning of democratic groups.
Lewin’s personal style focused on
Experiential Learning.
Born: September 09, 1890
into a Jewish Family, in Moglino, Poland On the warm September Evening, Kurt Lewin
spoke to an audience deeply concerned about the
Died: February 12, 1947 fate of their country and the future of democracy.
in Newtonville, Massachusetts His listeners welcomed his brave prediction, that
is;
Citizenship: Germany, United States
“the handling of human beings not as isolated
Field: Psychology individuals, but in the social setting of groups – will
soon be one of the most important theoretical and
Institutions: practical fields… There is no hope for creating a
- Institute for Social Research better world without a deeper scientific insight into
- Center for Group Dynamics (MIT) the function of leadership and culture, and of other
- National Training Laboratories essentials of group life. (Lewin, 1943)
- Duke University Berlim
And Lewin’s prediction came true.
He is known for; Group Dynamics, Action
Research, T-Groups.
FIELD THEORY
In 1910, he studied Doctor of Philosophy and
Psychology at University of Berlin and finished in - Which asserts that if a person is to be
1914 understood, he or she must be seen in the
light of how she or he views the world
He fought 4 years in World War 1 in the Infantry. (SUBJECTIVE REALITY) and not merely in
Left the army as a lieutenant with an Iron Cross, terms of how the world really is.
and returned to University of Berlin to teach. (OBJECTIVE REALITY)

He became part of the Psychological Institute and At any moment of life, a person stands within such
specifically made important contribution to the a field, her behavior (B) at a specific moment will
SCHOOL OF GESTALT PSYCHOLOGY as a be a function (F) of the Interaction between her
member of the faculty of the university. person (P) and her Environment (E)

He emigrated to the United States in 1932. B = Behavior

f = Function
P = Person
E = Environment
B = f (P,E)

If the person enters into dynamic interaction with

the environment, the environment becomes part
of her subjective reality, or the life space, which
LEWIN CALLS HER FIELD.

END OF REVIEWER