0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
14 Ansichten18 Seiten
Ueflnlng and Classlfylng Croups 8-1 Group(s) Two or more individuals interacting and interdependent. %ask Group Those working together to complete a job or task. Norming $tage the third stage in group development, characterized by close relationships.
Ueflnlng and Classlfylng Croups 8-1 Group(s) Two or more individuals interacting and interdependent. %ask Group Those working together to complete a job or task. Norming $tage the third stage in group development, characterized by close relationships.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PPT, PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
Ueflnlng and Classlfylng Croups 8-1 Group(s) Two or more individuals interacting and interdependent. %ask Group Those working together to complete a job or task. Norming $tage the third stage in group development, characterized by close relationships.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PPT, PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
8-1 Group(s) Two or more individuals interacting and interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives. ormaI Group A designated work group defined by the organization's structure. InformaI Group A group that is neither formally structured now organizationally determined, appears in response to the need for social contact. ueflnlng and Classlfylng Croups (conL'd) 8-2 Command Group A group composed of the individuals who report directly to a given manager. %ask Group Those working together to complete a job or task. Interest Group Those working together to attain a specific objective with which each is concerned. riendship Group Those brought together because they share one or more common characteristics. Jy eople !oln Croups 8-3 $ecurity $tatus $eIf-esteem AffiIiation Power GoaI Achievement @e llveSLage Model of Croup uevelopmenL 8-4 orming $tage The first stage in group development, characterized by much uncertainty. $torming $tage The second stage in group development, characterized by intragroup conflict. Norming $tage The third stage in group development, characterized by close relationships and cohesiveness. Croup uevelopmenL (conL'd) 8-5 Performing $tage The fourth stage in group development, when the group is fully functional. Adjourning $tage The final stage in group development for temporary groups, characterized by concern with wrapping up activities rather than performance. SLages of Croup uevelopmenL 8-6 Croup SLrucLure 8oles (conL'd) 8-7 RoIe(s) A set of expected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit. RoIe Identity Certain attitudes and behaviors consistent with a role. RoIe Perception An individual's view of how he or she is supposed to act in a given situation. Croup SLrucLure 8oles (conL'd) 8-8 RoIe Expectations ow others believe a person should act in a given situation. RoIe ConfIict A situation in which an individual is confronted by divergent role expectations. PsychoIogicaI Contract An unwritten agreement that sets out what management expects from the employee and vice versa. Croup SLrucLure norms 8-9 CIasses of Norms: Performance norms Appearance norms $ociaI arrangement norms AIIocation of resources norms CIasses of Norms: Performance norms Appearance norms $ociaI arrangement norms AIIocation of resources norms Norms Acceptable standards of behavior within a group that are shared by the group's members. Croup SLrucLure Slze 8-10 Group Size Performance ther concIusions: dd number groups do better than even. Groups of 7 or 9 perform better overaII than Iarger or smaIIer groups. ther concIusions: dd number groups do better than even. Groups of 7 or 9 perform better overaII than Iarger or smaIIer groups. $ociaI Loafing The tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively than when working individually. Croup @asks ueclslonmaklng Large groups faclllLaLe Le poollng of lnformaLlon abouL complex Lasks Smaller groups are beLLer sulLed Lo coordlnaLlng and faclllLaLlng Le lmplemenLaLlon of complex Lasks Slmple rouLlne sLandardlzed Lasks reduce Le requlremenL LaL group processes be effecLlve ln order for Le group Lo perform well 8-11 Croup ueclslon Maklng SLrengLs More compleLe lnformaLlon lncreased dlverslLy of vlews Plger quallLy of declslons (more accuracy) lncreased accepLance of soluLlons Jeaknesses More Llme consumlng (slower) lncreased pressure Lo conform uomlnaLlon by one or a few members Amblguous responslblllLy 8-12 Croup ueclslon Maklng (conL'd) 8-13 Groupthink #henomenon in which the norm for consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of alternative course of action. Groupshift A change in decision risk between the group's decision and the individual decision that member within the group would make, can be either toward conservatism or greater risk. SympLoms Cf @e CroupLlnk enomenon Croup members raLlonallze any reslsLance Lo Le assumpLlons Ley ave made Members apply dlrecL pressures on Lose wo express doubLs abouL sared vlews or wo quesLlon Le alLernaLlve favored by Le ma[orlLy Members wo ave doubLs or dlfferlng polnLs of vlew keep sllenL abouL mlsglvlngs @ere appears Lo be an llluslon of unanlmlLy 8-14 Croup ueclslonMaklng @ecnlques 8-15 Interacting Groups Typical groups, in which the members interact with each other facetoface. NominaI Group %echnique A group decisionmaking method in which individual members meet facetoface to pool their judgments in a systematic but independent fashion. Croup ueclslonMaklng @ecnlques 8-16 EIectronic Meeting A meeting in which members interact on computers, allowing for anonymity of comments and aggregation of votes. Brainstorming An ideageneration process that specifically encourages any and all alternatives, while withholding any criticism of those alternatives. valuaLlng Croup ffecLlveness 8-17 E X H I B I % 8-8 E X H I B I % 8-8 %PE GR&P Effectiveness Criteria Interacting Brainstorming NominaI EIectronic umber and quality of ideas Low Moderate High High Social pressure High Low Moderate Low Money costs Low Low Low High Speed Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Task orientation Low High High High Potential for interpersonal conflict High Low Moderate Low Commitment to solution High ot applicable Moderate Moderate Development of High High Moderate Low group cohesiveness