Discuss the Nature of Group Behavior and How It Affects Performance

...

[pic 11][pic 12]

-

Traditional and Contemporary Theories on Group Behavior

Traditional theorist Norman Triplett carried out the first study of Social Facilitation Theory in 1898. Triplett conceptualized, that individuals’ performance of routine task is influenced positively by the presence of others. Suggesting that individuals increase efforts when they feel self-assured and perform enthusiastically either through a competitive nature or to demonstrate abilities to superiors.

However, in 1920, theorists Allport suggests that although social presence and rivalry, stimulates increased performance in individuals’, too much competition may become a distraction and result in diminished performance. This theory was supported by Zajonc’ (1965) who suggested the presence of others simulates individuals to perform at a higher level. However, if the task becomes complex or unfamiliar it can trigger anxiety, threats and apprehension for the individual and create a negative outcome resulting in lesser performance. Zajonc’ draws our attention to this behaviour and referred to it as Social Interference.

Triplett’s Social Facilitation Theory has been strongly challenged in recent years by Uziel (2007) and supported by Stein (2009), who suggested a contemporary approach with the introduction of Social Orientation Theory. Uziel theory argues that individuals who display positive social presence such as high self esteem and extraverted personality, are associated with improved performance and would most likely experience Social Facilitation. Conversely, high levels of neuroticism and low self esteem in individuals results in reduced performance. This theory is founded on personality and is a more adequate measure of social effort of individual’s in-group performance rather than task complexity.

However Ringlemann’s (1913) traditional effects proposes that individuals’ performance in groups is dependent on the group size. His theory suggests that the larger the group, individuals contributes less to the task, believing that their input is insignificant causing work performance level to decrease. In latter years 1979, Bibb Latane’ and his colleagues agreed with Ringlemann’s theory and submits a contemporary prospective referred to as Social Loafing. This theory believes that being a part of a large group relieves the pressure of individual performance and accountability. Suggesting that there is a direct correlation to smaller work groups and increased individual’s performance.

Mullin and Copper (1994), also supports the contemporary theory of Group Cohesiveness, that the smaller the work groups, the higher and stronger the effect of performance output. However, for group cohesion to lead to increased performance, there are a number of factors that must be aligned such as: the level of communication and relationship amongst members, success of task and group pride (Rosh, Offermann, & Van, 2012; Shaw, 1981). Group cohesiveness can be positive if the group is focused on the objective of the organization. Group cohesion can be negative and reduce productivity if its members have its own agenda referred to as Groupthink.

Meanwhile a Team Performance Model, introduced by Drexler and Sibbet (1991 – 2004) offers a contemporary perspective on group performance. This model encapsulates the previous theories and suggests that work performance is a function of both structures. It offers a holistic method to organizations, which helps to optimize the workflow of teams as outlined below.

[pic 13]

Figure: 6 Drexler and Sibbet Seven Stage Team Performance Model

[pic 14]

Orientation-team members must determine tasks and roles of the group quickly to avoid anxiety for individuals and withdrawal from the group creating Social Interference. Conversely when Social Orientation occurs, individuals are most likely to participate in achieving work goals.

Trust building - team members establish trust when their individual roles and responsibilities become clear and they have a better understanding of each other’s work styles.

Goal clarification – at this stage conflict may arise and should be addressed.

Groupthink. Discussions must be agreed upon by all members and not forced.

Commitment – clear guidelines and procedures are established to ensure individuals’ tasks are completed to achieve the performance standard required by the organization, to avoid Social Loafing.

Implementation – the team may encounter challenges at this phase, shared processes should be introduced to ensure completion of task, demonstrating group Cohesiveness.

High Performance – Team should be motivated and mature and continue striving for high performance.

Renewal – Team introspection and issues are addressed, so individuals can have a better understanding of the group dynamics and increased work performance.

Conclusion

Looking at Traditional and Contemporary theories on group behaviour and their effects on work performance, the author’s findings are that group behaviour can be influenced either positively or negatively depending on the dynamics associated with the individual within the group.

While some traditional theorist suggest that individuals perform at a higher level in a competitive or supervised environment, but becomes anxious and demotivated if the task is complex creating social interference. Contemporary theorist Uziel disagrees and implies that individual performance is linked to personality traits such as self-esteem and not the complexity of the task. Ringlemann a traditional theorist infers that individuals’ behaviour is dependent on the group size, suggesting that smaller groups had a higher level of individual participation. Latane’ another contemporary theorist agrees with Ringlemann and suggests that larger groups may encourage social loafing amongst group members and thus lessen individual performance.

The author surmises that managers need to employ a holistic performance model that would include both the traditional and contemporary theories. This model should be designed to support team performance, dynamics, structure, processes and development cohesively. To ensure that groups and teams behaviour is aligned to positive work performance.

References