Threats to group performance

1
Threats to group performance
2
Outline

• I. Why groups?
• II. Threats to performance
• a) groupthink
• b) low motivation
• c) communication breakdowns
• d) personality conflicts
• III. Avoiding low performance

3
Why groups?

• To produce mutual benefits
• To accomplish tasks beyond the capacity of
  individuals
  
• To satisfy affiliative needs

4
Why is it difficult to work in groups?

• function of culture U.S. is an individualistic
  society
  
• function of rewards system the commons dilemma

5
Does culture matter?
26
Good
24
23.83
22
Perform in groups
Standardized Performance Measure
20
Perform alone
18.49
18
16
Poor
Peoples Republic of China
Country
6
Does culture matter?
26
Good
24
23.83
23.18
22
Perform in groups
Standardized Performance Measure
20.79
20
Perform alone
18.49
18
16
Poor
Peoples Republic of China
Israel
Country
7
Does culture matter?
26
Good
24.66
24
23.83
23.18
22
Perform in groups
Standardized Performance Measure
20.79
20
Perform alone
18.49
18
16.57
16
Poor
Peoples Republic of China
Israel
United States
Country
8
The Commons Dilemma

• farmers have common pasture for cattle
• for each individual farmer it is rational to
  increase the size of the herd
  
• for the collective this strategy is a disaster --
  overgrazing exhausts the common pasture

9
Groupthink

• hyper-agreement, inability to entertain
  alternative arguments
  
• strong function of group cohesion and group
  process
  
• self censorship, mind guarding

10
Groupthink An overview
High levels of group cohesion
Pressure to go along with the group
Reluctance to question the groups decisions
Antecedent processes
Illusion that decisions are unanimous Belief t
hat the group
is inherently correct
Symptoms
Failure to consider all alternatives Reluctanc
e to reexamine other options Biased and incomp
lete
use of information
Defects
Poor decisions
Result
11
The Road to Abilene

• conventional wisdom groupthink results from
  social pressure (e.g., conformity)
  
• alternative conformity is a comfortable myth
  that excuses us from acting
  
• Asch -- coercion in groups is real
• we concoct coercion as a justification for not
  rocking the boat

12
Low motivation I Needs satisfaction

• People have needs (e.g., Maslow)
• Jobs vary in their ability to fulfill needs
• Motivation varies as a function of the
  discrepancy between needs and the ability of jobs
  to fulfill needs
  
• Manipulation of job characteristics can change
  levels of motivation

13
Job characteristics model
Core Job Characteristics
Psychological States
Outcomes



Motivated Quality Satisfaction Low Turn
over
Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significa
nce
Autonomy Feedback
Meaningful Responsible Feedback
Moderators
Knowledge and Skill Growth-Need Strength Cont
ext Satisfactions
14
Job enlargement

• change job content by increasing the number of
  tasks
  
• tasks at same level, horizontal job loading

15
Job enrichment

• change job content by increasing responsibility
  and control over tasks
  
• tasks at different level, vertical job loading

16
Low Motivation II Equity

• Balance between inputs and outcomes
• based on social comparison
• compare your rewards to similar others
• Three states
• overpayment higher reward than deserved
• underpayment lower reward than deserved
• equitable reward equal to others

17
Social Comparison
Student A
Student B
Greater Than
Underpayment lower reward than deserved for Per
son B
Reward Effort
Overpayment higher reward than deserved for Per
son A
Reward Effort
Angry
Guilty
18
Social Comparison
Student A
Student B
Greater Than
Underpayment lower reward than deserved for Per
son B
Reward Effort
Overpayment higher reward than deserved for Per
son A
Reward Effort
Angry
Guilty
Less Than
Underpayment lower reward than deserved for Pe
rson A
Reward Effort
Overpayment higher reward than deserved for Pe
rson B
Reward Effort
Angry
Guilty
19
Social Comparison
Student A
Student B
Greater Than
Underpayment lower reward than deserved for Per
son B
Reward Effort
Overpayment higher reward than deserved for Per
son A
Reward Effort
Angry
Guilty
Less Than
Underpayment lower reward than deserved for Pe
rson A
Reward Effort
Overpayment higher reward than deserved for Pe
rson B
Reward Effort
Angry
Guilty
Equal To
Equitable reward for Person A
Equitable reward for Person B
Satisfied
Satisfied
20
Responses to equity situations

• Underpayment
• behavioral -- reduce effort
• psychological -- re-assess value of reward
• Overpayment
• behavioral -- increase effort
• psychological -- inflate sense of self-worth

21
Empirical data on underpayment
Factory with pay cut
Factory with no pay cut
9
8
7
6
5
Theft Rate percentage of unaccounted for loss of
property
4
3
2
1
0
Before Pay Cut
During Pay Cut
After Pay Cut
22
Communication breakdowns

• In aggregate, groups have the information
  required to solve most problems
  
• Communication channels link people to sources of
  information
  
• Channel effectiveness is influenced by
• noise and selective filtering
• shape and size of communication networks
• media richness

23
Noise and selective filtering
Transmission of encoded message through channels
Sender
Receiver
Noise
Idea to be sent
Encoded idea
Idea Received
Decoded idea
Feedback to sender
24
Shape and size of communication networks
Information flows to cen- tral person
Central person can perform task alone
Good performance
Superior
Simple Tasks
Information flows all around the network
No one person has all the required information
Poor performance
Information flows to cen- tral person
Central person becomes saturated
Poor performance
Complex Tasks
Information flows all around the network
No one person becomes saturated
Good performance
Superior
25
Media richness
26
The matching hypothesis

• complex messages are best sent via a rich medium
• simple messages are best sent via a lean medium
• managers who correctly match messages to media
  outperform other managers (e.g., Trevino, Daft,
  Lengel, 1987)

27
Personality conflict

• Myers-Briggs type indicator
• Created in the 40s by Katharine Briggs and her
  daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers
  
• based on Carl Jungs theory of individuation
  (understanding of the self)

28
The theory

• variations in behavior are a predictable pattern
  based on differences in the way people perceive
  info and make decisions
  
• Attitude toward life (Extroversion/Introversion)
• Perception (Sensing/Intuition)
• Judgment (Thinking/Feeling)

29
Development of types

• Perception Judgment
• IS IN IT IF
• ES EN ET EF

30
Myers-Briggs elaboration

• developed auxiliary type found in the opposite
  process
  
• if dominant type is sensing, then auxiliary type
  is judging (either thinking or feeling)
  
• added 4th dimension, orientation toward life to
  measure judging--orderly, planned and controlled
  or perceptive, flexible and spontaneous

31
Myers-Briggs I/E (25/75)

• Introversion vs. Extroversion
• Source of your energy
• Shows your flexibility
• Iturn toward your inner resources
• Ewant to connect on a regular basis
• cultural emphasis on togetherness

32
Myers-Briggs N/S (25/75)

• Intuition vs. Sensing
• Type of info which you code as significant
• N Big picture, impression, abstract
• S Facts, Tangible
• culture throws out stats thrives on factoids

33
Myers-Briggs T/F (W-35/65 M-65/35)

• Thinking vs. Feeling
• criteria that guide you values you use/emphasis
  that is more important in life
  
• Tis this logical, sensible, will it work?
• Fis this fair? humane? will everybody be okay?

34
T/F

• Tcompliment on quality and competency
• Fpersonality we really need you/what would we
  do without you?
  
• taken to extreme, T is cold/uncaring
• taken to extreme, F is overly emotional

35
Myers-Briggs P/J (20/80)

• Perceiving vs. Judging
• Orientation toward closure
• Jmake decisions and move on
• Pdont like closure want open options not too
  fast now impulsive always believe there is more
  into to gather
  
• taken to extreme, J is making lists and close
  minded
  
• taken to extreme, P is wishy washy

36
Some types around our school

• Dean Frost IS T/F J
• Shirley ESF P/J
• Karen D ISFJ
• MPH ENTP
• TAF ENT P/J

37
Is this science?

• No, said Bob Bjork, UCLA in 1991 National
  Research Council study. Unfortunately...the
  popularity of the instrument is not coincident
  with supportive research results because the
  test is manipulated by test-takers whims at the
  moment

38
Why use this? Ah-ha!

• Heightens our awareness of communication with
  others
  
• Reminds us to expect and appreciate differences
• Permits us to consider our own responses and
  entertain other behaviors

39
Avoiding low performance

• Groupthink -- Question authority!
• Motivation --
• If it isnt interesting, it wont get done.
• Spread the dread.
• Communication --
• Say what you mean and check comprehension.
• Dont use face-to-face time to accomplish simple
  tasks (e.g., meeting scheduling).

40
(No Transcript)