Formation of group behaviour in the organisations
In the second case on the first
place in a group life intergroup conflicts act. Obshche-proizvodstvennye
problems pale into insignificance. Unity of such group eventually collapses.
However while it does not happen, the group makes negative impact on behaviour
of all organisation. The manager should know how to operate processes which
rally people in group, and depending on a unity orientation to apply those or
other measures of influence. There are various techniques which allow to estimate
quantitatively degree of unity and its orientation. One of them is offered R.
S. Vajsmanom. Its essence consists in the following. The set from twenty
personal qualities closely connected with business dialogue is given to members
of collective. Among these qualities? The constancy, endurance, initiative,
sociability, sense of duty, knowledge of the possibilities, persistence,
loyalty to group norms, sincerity, etc. they should choose five qualities
which, in their opinion, are necessary for productive work and which are
cultivated in group From this set. Comparison of repetitions of separate
qualities to a total sum of elections allows to deduce factor
tsennostno-orientatsionnogo unities of group. Depending on this factor the
manager can undertake actions or on unity strengthening, or on its destruction.
German scientists V.Zigert and L.Lang make for this purpose following
recommendations.
For unity strengthening:
1. Help group to test the general
success;
2. Try to strengthen trust of
members of group to each other and first of all to the leader;
3. Develop feeling of an accessory
to group as sensation of a certain feature, strengthen this feeling, carrying
out joint group actions, showing a more potential, new possibilities in the
decision of the problems, opening in teamwork;
4. Take care of that the accessory
to group delivered pleasure, answered motivation to an accessory, respect,
self-esteem, prestige;
5. Support belief of group in a
reality of the decision of tasks in view. For unity destruction:
1. In the form of drama show to
group hopelessness of its activity;
2. Show to group impossibility of
achievement of the purposes put by it;
3. Sow mistrust between people and
first of all to the leader of group;
4. Form the dissenting subgroups,
stimulate flight from group, encourage deserters, and is better. Transform into
the deserter of the leader of group;
5. Make feeling of an accessory to
group with feeling weariness, discontent;
6. Eliminate the leader by its
moving on other place of work. To the manager can be useful and councils of the
American scientists which recommend:
For unity strengthening:
1. To make group it is less;
2. To encourage the consent with the
group purposes;
3. To stimulate competition to other
groups;
4. To give out compensation to all
group, instead of its separate members;
5. If it is necessary, to isolate
group from negative influence of other workers. For unity destruction:
1. To make group it is more;
2. To disband group;
3. To give out compensations not to
all group, and its separate members;
4. To encourage disagreement with
group problems;
5. Not to isolate group. Also
recommendations of domestic scientist N. Vlasovoj, which in the second volume
of the three-volume edition at last are worthy. Also you will wake up the boss
results 22 rules of management of group:
1. Estimate potential possibilities
of people and distribute between them role positions in group;
2. Designate a place and value of
each member of group in the decision of the general problem;
3. Put before group an overall aim,
without having forgotten to convince everyone, what an overall aim. It and its
personal purpose;
4. Distribute duties,
responsibility, the rights, the power and means, having developed competent
duty regulations and having balanced resources;
5. Discuss the first difficulties
with orientation to revealing of their reasons;
6. Suggest group to qualify the
activity constantly;
7. Stabilise, rally group, create a
favorable climate, and then simulate crisis that people have learnt to resolve
contradictions and conflicts (a problem demanding time, resources, confidence
of approachibility of expected results and participation small, but the
qualified group of psychology.
8. Develop collective decision-making.
Authorship appropriate to group, however in group give due to everyone
depending on its contribution;
9. Develop constant criteria of an
assessment of works and follow them;
10. Conduct collective and public
analysis of contradictions;
11. Support in group the main
values: respect for everyone, an estimation under the contribution, orientation
on positive in the person, publicity, democratic character, the account of
specific features;
12. Open sense and the importance of
work, a place and value of everyone in a common cause;
13. Decentralize the power and give
full independence to all members of group (but do not forget about what it was
told in item 4);
14. Encourage the initiative,
exclude practice of search guilty. It is important to find the reasons and ways
of elimination of errors;
15. Do not forget about constant
improvement of professional skill and sensation of prospect for everyone;
16. All group problems resolve in
common and publicly;
17. Give the constant information on
achievements of everyone;
18. To all members of group grant
the right freely to give any information, to express any opinions or doubts
concerning any discussed question;
19. Appoint one member of group to a
role the lawyer of a devil - the person who is protecting obviously wrong
business or engaged pettifogging, discrepancies, doubtful positions, the
errors, criticising made decisions from the various points of view. It helps to
accept faster correct, for all comprehensible and comprehensively well-founded
decision;
20. Listen to the various points of
view and criticism also it is quiet, as well as that coincides with your point
of view;
21. Separate efforts on generating
of ideas from their estimation. At first collect all offers, and then discuss
pluses and minuses of each of them.
Chapter 4. Potential of group and
its productivity
Formation of potential of group is
influenced by all its basic characteristics. But the special place among them
is occupied with group norms. They are a core of all processes of group
dynamics and directly are connected with productivity of potential both the
group, and its each member and all organisation. The researches spent
approximately at the same time by V. M. Bekhterev in Russia and E. Mejo in the
USA, have allowed them to come to identical conclusions. It appears, it is
easier to person to work, if the group which member it is, supports it and
waits from it for good results. Efficiency of group considerably increases in
that case at the expense of increase of individual productivity. Moreover, the
group norm of productivity can increase several times if results of work of
everyone influence success of the others and depend on their general success.
E. Majo were explained by this phenomenon to what norms promote creation of
atmosphere which not only defines behaviour of everyone who considers group the,
but also strengthens display so-called effect when the general productivity in
collective develops under the formula or 2+2 = 5, or 2+2 = 3. Positive or
negative character of influence of this informal structure on productivity
depends on variety of factors. J. D. Krasovsky divides them on two groups: the
cores and variables. We them will name qualitative and quantitative. The
qualitative concern:
1. Professional groups, indicators
are interchangeability, complementarity;
2. The moral and psychological unity
shown in norms of mutual aid;
3. Style of the leader J. D.
Krasovsky includes in group of quantitative factors:
1. Group level of claims, that is
mood of workers on achievement intermediate and end results;
2. Qualifying potential, sufficient
for realisation of total and off-schedule indicators;
3. Requirements to an end result
which defines group work;
4. An openness of assessments of
works of group from outside the head, especially in situations of intergroup
rivalry;
5. structure;
6. Intragroup interpersonal
communications;
7. Time of existence of group;
8. Group norm of productivity.
Each of the listed factors in own
way is shown at influence of informal structure of interpersonal relations on
productivity of group depending on the positive or negative orientation. Thus
the factor which will organise, focuses influence of all components, the group
norm is. It is confirmed with F. Borodina's researches which have been spent by
them on the basis of numerous situations. One of them is resulted in their
book? Attention: the conflict in design office in information department there
was a group of translators (5 persons). It worked well, exceeded norm. The head
defined work total amount, and translators distributed it among themselves,
helping each other. In the end of every week head held group meeting, estimated
work of everyone and informed on work forthcoming week.
Meetings passed is live. Translators
offered an additional material to discussion. But in group there was one
translator who had no enough experience and qualifications that is why all to
it helped when in it there was a necessity. It is it irritated a little, but it
was grateful to all for the help. And here once at traditional meeting she has
offered the big series of articles containing a material which was extremely
necessary for design office for transfer. The head has suggested it to be
accepted immediately to transfers of these articles, having postponed that it
translated. It, without feeling sorry for forces and time, sat all the days long
and evenings, working even in the days off. The first transfers have helped
designers to promote essentially in workings out. Its transfers have appeared
quality, the work volume was considerably exceeded by what was in group.
A management of design office and
the head of department were very happy with its work and have highly
appreciated the initiative. It began to work independently. In two months the
relation to the translator from outside employees has sharply changed. The head
of department could not understand that has occurred. It worked in a separate
office but when came into a room to translators, saw that it sits with
tear-stained eyes, and in a room the burdensome silence hangs. Inquiries gave
nothing: she referred to personal circumstances, and the others shrugged
shoulders. The true reason from the head hid, and he felt it. Then he has
decided to talk to it. It was found out that translators at first did not
approve its initiatives, and then hairdresses, cosmetics, clothes have started
to exchange at its presence caustic remarks concerning appearance. Then on it
have some times palmed off incorrect idioms translations. And then began accuse
her of a careerism openly. But it worked still qualitatively and much, and the
head calmed her that all will change for the better. However the situation
developed to the worst.
Besides the total amount of
transfers in group began to decrease. The group has started to behave in a
pointed manner: at traditional weekly meetings all sat silently and waited for
instructions from the head. It began to show them claims, has demanded to stop
obstruction of initiatives, but has come across deaf spiteful silence. Then it
has replaced the initiative translator in other room. Her have left alone, but
the volume of transfers was still reduced, and then stabilised at lower level,
than several months ago. The head criticised group and held up as an example
the initiative of that working woman which they have rejected. Translators
answered with resolute and amicable repulse, appealing to existing norms of
transfer. - there are specifications, we on them and work. The group became
uncontrollable. Then the head has achieved revision of awards for an
overfulfillment of norms and for quality of transfers. The result has appeared
unexpected: four translators have submitted a resignation.
After a while the head remained with
one initiative translator. This situation opens intragroup relations from the
different parties. It shows, first, that industrial groups are formed on the
basis of the general for all members of norm of productivity and break up as a
result of nonacceptance of this norm. Secondly, in such groups there are
defining roles, statuses, at everyone the culture of behaviour, the
requirements to members of group, the sanctions in relation to them, and
especially to those who drops out of it, the claims to a management. The group
together with the leader protects itself from encroachments on developed
interpersonal relations. Thirdly, the group norm of productivity because in
organizational management it is the weak spot becomes the basic weapon of
struggle against a management. The group is ready to go on a victim for the
sake of maintenance of the status, hoping besides to achieve and other
advantages. If it does not occur, the group can go on extreme measures:
entirely will leave. In the fourth, each head of group should build with
workers of the relation how it is demanded by law of interpersonal business
dialogue.
However it was considered by the
head of department of the information. It has admitted variety of errors:
1. Has made administrative
decisions, without reckoning with opinion of group;
2. Has answered a call of the
initiative employee, but has looked through reaction of group to this call;
3. Opposed to its group and has not
understood, as well as why business relations have regenerated in the
interpersonal;
4. Has transplanted it in a separate
room and has received the formal. The relation of translators to work:
completely;
5. At last, has definitively destroyed
all relations when has achieved revision of bonus system.
The conclusion
In the conclusion it is possible to
draw some conclusions and to formulate ten restrictions which disturb to
disclosing of potential of group and its productivity:
1. Unfitness of the head its
inability on the personal qualities to rally employees, to inspire them on
effective working methods.
2. Not qualified employees a typical
lack imbalance of functions of the workers, an inadequate combination of
professional and human qualities. For example, Vudkok and Frensis offer
interesting enough distribution of office roles according to which in each
working group should be idea men the directing, the planning, carrying out a
role the deterrent and a little executors. The combination of roles depends on
specificity of the collective, thus one worker can combine a little from the
listed roles.
3. Not constructive climate. It is
characterized by absence at a command of fidelity to problems, there is no high
degree of mutual support in a combination to care of the blessing of each
employee.
4. An illegibility of the purposes.
The insufficient coordination of the personal and collective purposes,
inability of a management and the personnel to the compromise. Authors
underline necessity of periodic updating of objects in view, differently
members of collective lose representation about prospects of the activity.
5. Low results of work. It is meant
that the collective should no on reached, should show aggressiveness in
achievement of the significant purposes that promotes a high self-estimation of
employees, growth of personal professionalism.
6. An inefficiency of methods of
work. Value of the correct organisation of gathering and granting of the
information, acceptance of correct and timely decisions is underlined.
7. Shortage of an openness and
confrontation presence. Necessity of free criticism, discussion strong and
weaknesses of the done work, existing disagreements without false fear to be
misunderstood is marked, to break business etiquette, to cause the conflict.
However in practice it is exigeant, or special preparation of the personnel and
the head is required.
8. Insufficient professionalism and
low culture of employees. Desire to have in collective of strong employees with
high level of individual abilities quite clearly. It is possible to consider
correct the point of view according to which the developed employee should be
vigorous, be able to operate the emotions, ready to be open to state the
opinion, to possess ability to change the point of view under the influence of
arguments, instead of forces, it is good to state the opinion.
9. And 10. Low creative abilities of
the personnel and not constructive relations with other collectives. Last two
obstacles in a way of development of collective are axiomatic and do not
require the comment.
The literature list
1. Вайсман Р. С. Связь
межличностных отношений с групповой эффективностью деятельности. // Вопросы
психологии. - 1974. - №4
2. Гибсон Джеймс Л.,
Иванцевич Дж., Донелли Дж. «Организация: поведение, структура, процессы». - М.,
2000.
3. Глумаков В. Н.
Организационное поведение. М., 2002.
4. Громкова М.Т.
Организационное поведение. М., 1999.
5. Карташова Л. Н.,
Никонова Т. В., Соломанидина Т. О. «Организационное поведение». М., 2000
6. Красовский Ю. Д.
Организационное поведение. М., 1999.
7. Спивак В. Н.
Организационное поведение и управление персоналом. СПб: Питер, 2000.
Страницы: 1, 2
|