This week’s readings focus on groups and teams, the differences between them and the strategy to develop and efficient team. A group can be characterized as at least two people, connecting and collective, who have common specific goals to accomplish. Groups can be either formal or casual. I would like to focus on two models which I believe are important, they are five stage group model and punctuated-equilibrium model. The five-stage group-development model recommends that groups are designed through the process of forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Forming stage, we see a lot of uncertainty about the objective, architecture, and control.
Conflicts are seen in storming stage. Understanding, bonding and cohesiveness are formed in the norming stage. The model accept that bunches turn out to be increasingly successful as they advance through the initial four phases. The punctuated-equilibrium model suggests that group performance or advancement is moderately inconsistent when nearing deadlines. A trigger such as time or deadlines keep the employees motivated and focused. Status is a socially characterized position or rank given to gatherings or gathering individuals by others. Higher status people are valued more in common places. According to status characteristics hypothesis, status is derived from the power a person wields over others; a person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals; and an individual’s personal characteristics. High status people are preferred ready to oppose similarity over low status people and are bound to be decisive in a group setting.
A groups behavior is also affected by its size. Large groups gain the advantage of having diverse inputs while the smaller groups have productivity. The size of a group also affects group behavior. While large groups are more effective at gaining diverse input, smaller groups tend to be more productive. Social loafing is one reason for absence of efficiency in bigger groups. Research shows that cohesiveness is directly proportional to group’s productivity as it attracts and hold the individuals as a group and keep them motivated. Group shift refers to a group decision making phenomena. Cooperative choices will in general misrepresent the underlying position of the individual part and that move is more regularly towards more serious hazard. Cross functional teams are budding in reputation because they typically surpass individual performances, especially when the errands being performed require different abilities, judgment, and experience.
Groups are progressively adaptable and receptive to evolving occasions, as they have the capacity to rapidly collect, convey, refocus, and disband. They are a compelling method for the management to democratize their associations and increase worker inspiration. It is important to note that groups and teams are not the same. A gathering is at least two people, collaborating and reliant, who share specific goals. A work group is a gathering that interfaces basically to share data and to settle on choices to enable every part to perform inside his or her zone of duty. Interestingly, a work group creates positive cooperative energy through facilitated exertion. Members individual endeavors result in a dimension of execution that is more noteworthy than the total of those individual input sources. The key parts making up powerful groups can be gathered into four general classes: context, composition, work design, and process.
A group viability is dependent on logical factors such as presence of enough assets or capital, effective leadership and architecture, a trustworthy environment, and a performance assessment and reward framework that reflects group commitments. An assorted variety of aptitudes is important to guarantee a satisfactory learning base inside the group. These incorporate technical expertise, critical thinking and decision-making and interpersonal abilities.
I would like to conclude that group decision making techniques include conceptualizing, ostensible gatherings, and electronic meetings. Brainstorming or conceptualizing uses a thought creating process that energizes all choices, while retaining any analysis of those options. The nominal group method limits discourse or relational correspondence until the all the thoughts are exhibited. Thoughts are quietly and freely ranked. The idea or thought with the most astounding ranking decides a ultimate conclusion. The strength and performance of a team is also reliant upon complementary individual preferences with team role requirement. Cross functionally adaptable people make a better productive group when they are less than 10 people in size. Good team players are formed by motivating incentives. An association’s reward framework should be improved to empower cooperative efforts rather than competitive ones.