Group Productivity

Group Productivity 25 January, 2014 Introduction A research study has been requested on the productivity of a group’s productivity within a well-known and successful retail store. Every group will have problems, but it is important to understand that the problems can be identified and corrected if proper steps are taken. This paper details how the research was conducted, the observations that were noted as being subpar to great teamwork, how those things affect the productivity of the group, and recommendations on what can be done to fix these problems. Researching the Group A description of the group is needed to understand the roles each one plays in productivity for the company. The head of each of the following departments was present at each meeting; advertisement, product placement, ordering, finance, website development, and market research. Of these members, three are women and four are of a race other than Caucasian, producing a gender and racially diverse team. The leader of the group, which was assigned by the CEO of the company, is the head of the financial department. To best study the productivity of the group, participant observation research was the method utilized (Losh, 2011). The observer was located in the same room as the working group for three weeks before any notes were taken. The purpose for this initial three week period was to offset the group recognizing a new person watching them, causing them to act differently than they normally would. Four weeks had been planned for allowing the group to become used to this extra person being in the group, but after three weeks it was determined the group behaviors had already changed from when the observer first integrated herself. Group members were talking freely about personal and professional lives during breaks and including the observer in conversations, indicating they had become comfortable with the new presence and able to act as they normally would. At this time, detailed notes were taken while observing the meetings. After two weeks of studying the way the group interacted with one another, interviews were then conducted in a less structured way to continue the comfortable feelings the group members had with the observer. Working hypotheses were used due to the fact that the researcher was unable to determine structured deductive hypotheses from the lack of knowledge of what the researcher might observe (Losh, 2011). Observations There were four problems identified as a hindrance to the productivity of the group. They are as follows: Role conflicts within the group, communication problems among the group members, lack of cohesiveness among the diverse members, excessive intergroup conflict. Each one will be further described to depict how these determinations were made. Role conflict was observed after witnessing members from departments attempting to play roles that would include them in other departments. For example, the head of ordering often had plans for how the financial department could shift funds in different ways in order to provide more money to order a product. Another observation made quite often was the confusion of roles between the product placement department and the advertisement department. It appeared that each person serving these departments concerned themselves often of how the other department was doing their job. “Frequently role conflict arises when these expectations about how to play a role or set of roles are inconsistent in some way (Losh, 2011).” Communication problems among group members were also noted. Once conflict had arisen, it was clear to those outside of the situation that unresolved situations led to emotions hindering the ability for all involved to communicate effectively. In some cases, one of the affected members would remain silent when input was needed from their department, while others members had a change in the manner of communication while addressing the group. The change in manner was usually a petulance or an anger observable in the tone and facial expressions. This created either a lack of communication or a focus on the wrong types of communication when the focus needed to be on the project. A lack of cohesiveness in the group due to diverse members was identified. Cohorts have been developed within the group among the female and male members as well as with the members of the group that are racially equal (Losh, 2011). At first this seemed to not have an impact within the group, but after further examination it was observed that these cohorts have a closer personal relationship while interacting outside of the meetings. This personal relationship carries over into the professional relationship while conducting meetings. The cohesion between the cohorts showed the willingness to help one another in a cheerful manner more so than with those that were not included in these cohorts. Lastly, excessive intergroup conflict was observed. Internal competition was one of the reasons for conflict between group members. Disagreements were had with important decisions that needed to be made in order to complete the project. Disagreements are to be expected, but in this case the disagreements caused anger and resentment and were not productive to the project. The conflicts were not dealt with as they should have been; quickly and in a way that would produce a better product as a result of the conflict. “Past research has indicated that early task conflict can trigger subsequent relationship conflict during teamwork (Martinez-Moreno, Zornoza & Thompson, 2012).” Both of these kinds of conflict have occurred within this group. Impacts of Productivity Role conflicts within groups have a large impact on productivity. “Conflict is highly prevalent in the organizational arena… members of work groups and teams within organizations experience and manage conflict with their counterparts on an everyday basis (Desivilya & Eizen, 2005).” Within the group, role conflict caused the team members to focus on that conflict instead of the important tasks at hand. Not being fully trained on how to handle such conflict in a timely manner since it is inevitable that it will occur causes a longer delay than is necessary in the group’s productivity. The difference in how department heads feel other department heads should be running their department led to frustration on both sides, causing additional focus to be trained on these emotions rather than the task or even how to solve the conflict occurring. Communication problems within the group impacted productivity by preventing the correct communication from taking place. This caused the project to suffer from a lack of information that could have better the results from certain departments that remained silent during key periods of communication after conflict had arisen within the group. The project also suffered from the change in attitudes from those that did not remain silent after conflict, creating a tense environment and less focus on the project at hand. The lack of cohesiveness due to member diversity creates a slightly less productive environment. It is unclear whether the higher levels of cohesion have a negative impact on the emotions of the members not involved in the cohorts, but it can be assumed that there is most likely at least a little resentment and feeling of being left out. The effects on productivity stems from others being more willing to be helpful towards others in a cohort, resulting in a better working relationship and more productivity being accomplished. Although there is no proof that productivity is suffering, it is safe to assume in this case that if all members of the group felt included in the cohesiveness shared by the rest, then the entire group would share in the willingness to be more helpful toward one another and productivity levels would benefit. Excessive intergroup conflict led to less productivity in several ways. “Internal competition can be detrimental to group cohesion and lead to members resenting one another (Losh, 2011), which is precisely what the team exhibited during the study. Again, focus was not on the project at hand, but on the conflict presented to them. Process conflict was prevalent here, and is defined as “an awareness of controversies about aspects of how task accomplishment will proceed (Martinez-Moreno, Zornoza & Thompson, 2012).” Recommendations for Improvement Role Conflicts within the Group The leader of the group should establish the specific roles of each group member prior to starting a new project. “A lot depends on the group leader. He or she must be objective to all sides, allow disagreement to be aired, and insist that interaction remain courteous (Losh, 2011).” “A relationship between group identification and constructive conflict management patterns (Desivilya & Eizen, 2005)” would be the result of this establishing of roles. Conflict is not all bad and can result in great productivity if handled correctly. “For example, within-group conflict can force a group to clarify and prioritize its goals (Losh, 2011).” Communication Problems within the Group Bennett and Lyons (2011) discuss the importance of communication in the workplace. The importance is obvious for many reasons, but the solution to bad communication may not be so obvious. They suggest a module in which sessions are held to teach effective communications in a medical environment. A similar module should be developed by a communications specialist and be made mandatory for all group members to attend prior to future projects. This module should address how to communicate effectively in a normal productive environment, as well as how to communicate effectively when in many types of distress that has arisen from conflict or confusion. Practice scenarios should be created in these sessions to train the group members how to handle different types of situations. Learning to apply to knowledge is as important as learning the knowledge. Lack of Cohesiveness due to the Diversity in the Group The company can improve the cohesiveness of the group using several means. Structural sources of cohesion, emotional and physical arousal, fostering the importance of common group goals as well as noting the importance of interdependent goals, focusing on the shared identity of group members, and organizational factors could be used to do this. “Structural sources of cohesion refer to properties in the group's physical or social environment or regular, systematic rewards that a group can offer to its members (Losh, 2011).” Emotional and physical arousal can take place by providing the group with an environment conducive to calm, happy and relaxing feelings and spending time identifying a common enemy in which the group can use to focus projects on competing against. Sharing a common goal, such as the success of the project leading to a certain level of success for the entire company, fosters cohesion through accomplishment as well as noting the importance of the interdependent goals for each department head so each feels the importance of the task. Focusing on the shared identity of the group fosters cohesion by being involved with such a notable company they are proud to be a part of, while organizational factors should also be involved. “Although an individual's feelings about group members in general may be neutral or even hostile rather than positive, the formal organization in which the group is embedded can be very attractive. This continues to focus our attention on what the group itself (rather than individual members) can offer as opposed to interpersonal attraction (Losh, 2011).” Fostering group cohesion although diversity is present in the group should be high on company’s priorities in creating a group that is more productive. “Cohesion is now generally described as group members’ inclinations to forge social bonds, resulting in members sticking together and remaining united (Casey-Campbell & Martens, 2009).” Excessive Intergroup Conflict Recommendations to correct the intergroup conflict include creating an equal status among the members by having each member recognize others as the leader of a department that is vital to the company and without which, the company would be unable to be successful (Losh, 2011). Another recommendation is fostering support from the leadership level (Losh, 2011). “If support at the top appears lukewarm or nonexistent, not much gets done. Members of organizations respond to signals given by their leaders, managers, bosses, and others. These members will react, accordingly, depending on whether that signal is positive (support) or negative (lack of support) (Losh, 2011).” Additionally, set superordinate goals. Letting the group members know that without their participation, the project cannot be successful allows those members to want to cooperate with other members and help resolve conflicts (Losh, 2011). Finally, communication is key. The leader should take an active role in fostering productive communication when conflict occurs in a way that allows the team to handle the conflict and take away good lessons from it and move on. These suggestions will allow for a much more productive team. Company-wide Training A final recommendation is not only a training program for the group that the research was conducted on, but a company-wide training program. The team members will not always remain the same. Some may need to be replaced for several reasons, but continuity of how teams handle the problems discussed in this paper can continue if the entire company goes through the same types of training in preparation for possible replacements. “Research has shown that task conflict among team members can increase the affective acceptance of team decisions, the stimulation of creativity, and the success of decision-making processes (Martinez-Moreno, Zornoza & Thompson, 2012).” This is why it is so important that member be trained not only to handle the problems that can arise, but how to take away important lessons from the problems to use as a beneficial resource to the company. Training should include the following; an understanding of formal and informal groups, how to recognize and resolve conflicts within groups based on factors such as diversity, status and disagreements, effective communication, group cohesion, and leadership roles. With a better understanding of the internal workings of groups, individuals will be apt to recognize situations they have been taught and can work to better handle all types of problems to create a more productive group for the company. Conclusion The methods of the research being conducted have been discussed, as well as the observations of problems that were found in the group. The effects of these problems on group productivity were examined and recommendations have been given to fix them and provide for a better group for the company. It has been shown above that although each group will have problems, understanding how the problems can be identified and resolved are very important.  References Bennett, K., & Lyons, Z. (2011). Communication skills in medical education: An integrated approach. Education Research and Perspectives, 38(2), 45-56. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1020696333?accountid=32521. Casey-Campbell, M., & Martens, M. L. (2009). Sticking it all together: A critical assessment of the group cohesion–performance literature. International Journal Of Management Reviews, 11(2), 223-246. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2008.00239.x. Desivilya, H., & Eizen, D. (2005). Conflict management in work teams: the role of social- efficacy and group identification. International Journal Of Conflict Management, 16(2), 183-208. Losh, S. (2011). Group behavior in organizations. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. Martínez-Moreno, E., Zornoza, A., González-Navarro, P., & Thompson, L. (2012). Investigating face-to-face and virtual teamwork over time: When does early task conflict trigger relationship conflict?. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, And Practice, 16(3), 159-171. doi:10.1037/a0029569. Nishii, L. H. (2013). The benefits of climate for inclusion for gender-diverse groups. Academy Of Management Journal, 56(6), 1754-1774. doi:10.5465/amj.2009.0823. RUNNING HEADER: GROUP PRODUCTIVITY 1 Group Productivity 10