Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
FOUNDATIONS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Differentiate between formal and informal groups.
Compare two models of group development.
Explain how group interaction can be analyzed.
Identify the key factors in explaining group behavior.
Explain how role requirements change in different situations.
Describe how norms exert influence on an individual’s behavior.
Define social loafing and its effect on group performance.
Identify the benefits and disadvantages of cohesive groups.
List the strengths and weaknesses of group decision-making.
Contrast the effectiveness of interacting, brainstorming, nominal, and electronic meeting groups.
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
We will cover a lot of territory in this chapter. Since we essentially organize our discussion around the group
behavior model in Exhibit 8-5, let’s use this model to summarize our findings regarding performance and
satisfaction.
Performance
Any predictions about a group’s performance must begin by recognizing that work groups are part of a larger
organization and that factors such as the organization’s strategy, authority structure, selection procedures, and
reward system can provide a favorable or unfavorable climate for the group to operate within. For example, if an
organization is characterized by distrust between management and workers, it is more likely that work groups in
that organization will develop norms to restrict effort and output than will work groups in an organization where
trust is high. Managers should not look at any group in isolation. Rather, they should begin by assessing the
degree of support external conditions provide the group. It is obviously a lot easier for any work group to be
productive when the overall organization of which it is a part is growing and it has both top management’s support
and abundant resources. Similarly, a group is more likely to be productive when its members have the requisite
skills to do the group’s tasks and the personality characteristics that facilitate working well together.
A number of structural factors show a relationship to performance. Among the more prominent are role
perception, norms, status inequities, the size of the group, its demographic makeup, the group’s task, and
cohesiveness.
There is a positive relationship between role perception and an employee’s performance evaluation. The degree
of congruence that exists between an employee and his or her boss in the perception of the employee’s job
influences the degree to which that employee will be judged as an effective performer by the boss. To the extent
that the employee’s role perception fulfills the boss’s role expectations, the employee will receive a higher
performance evaluation.
Norms control group member behavior by establishing standards of right and wrong. If managers know the norms
of a given group, they can help to explain the behaviors of its members. Where norms support high output,
managers can expect individual performance to be markedly higher than where group norms aim to restrict
output. Similarly, acceptable standards of absenteeism will be dictated by the group norms. Status inequities
create frustration and can adversely influence productivity and the willingness to remain with an organization.
Among those individuals who are equity sensitive, incongruence is likely to lead to reduced motivation and an
increased search for ways to bring about fairness (i.e., taking another job).
The impact of size on a group’s performance depends upon the type of task in which the group is engaged.
Larger groups are more effective at fact-finding activities. Smaller groups are more effective at action-taking
tasks. Our knowledge of social loafing suggests that if management uses larger groups, efforts should be made to
provide measures of individual performance within the group.
162
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
We found the group’s demographic composition to be a key determinant of individual turnover. Specifically, the
evidence indicates that group members who share a common age or date of entry into the work group are less
prone to resign. We also found that cohesiveness can play an important function in influencing a group’s level of
productivity. Whether or not it does depends on the group’s performance-related norms. The primary contingency
variable moderating the relationship between group processes and performance is the group’s task. The more
complex and interdependent the tasks, the more that inefficient processes will lead to reduced group
performance.
Satisfaction
As with the role perception-performance relationship, high congruence between a boss and employee as to the
perception of the employee’s job shows a significant association with high employee satisfaction. Similarly, role
conflict is associated with job-induced tension and job dissatisfaction.
Most people prefer to communicate with others at their own status level or a higher one rather than with those
below them. As a result, we should expect satisfaction to be greater among employees whose job minimizes
interaction with individuals who are lower in status than themselves.
The group size-satisfaction relationship is what one would intuitively expect: Larger groups are associated with
lower satisfaction. As size increases, opportunities for participation and social interaction decrease, as does the
ability of members to identify with the group’s accomplishments. At the same time, having more members also
prompts dissension, conflict, and the formation of subgroups which all act to make the group a less pleasant entity
of which to be a part.
WEB EXERCISES
At the end of each chapter of this instructor’s manual, you will find suggested exercises and ideas for researching
the WWW on OB topics. The exercises “Exploring OB Topics on the Web” are set up so that you can simply
photocopy the pages, distribute them to your class, and make assignments accordingly. You may want to assign
the exercises as an out-of-class activity or as lab activities with your class. Within the lecture notes the graphic
will note that there is a WWW activity to support this material.
The chapter opens introducing an idea the New Economy is adapting to status differences. Email is a
communication tool that it’s proponents claim democratizes organizations. It allows people to communicate
horizontally and vertically unimpeded by gatekeepers. However, despite its egalitarian intentions, status
differences have crept in. Status differences is just one of a number of natural occurring actions in groups. This
chapter further explores group phenomenon.
163
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
CHAPTER OUTLINE
Defining and Classifying Groups
Notes:
1. A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent,
who have come together to achieve particular objectives.
2. Groups can be either formal or informal.

Formal groups—those defined by the organization’s structure, with
designated work assignments establishing tasks
a. The behaviors that one should engage in are stipulated by and directed
toward organizational goals.
b. An airline flight crew is an example of a formal group.

Informal groups—alliances that are neither formally structured nor
organizationally determined
a. Natural formations in the work environment in response to the need for
social contact
b. Three employees from different departments who regularly eat lunch
together is an informal group.
3. It is possible to sub-classify groups as command, task, interest, or friendship
groups.

Command groups are dictated by the formal organization.
a. The organization chart determines a command group.
b. Composed of direct reports to a given manager

Task groups—organizationally determined—represent those working
together to complete a job task.
a. A task group’s boundaries are not limited to its immediate hierarchical
superior. It can cross command relationships.
b. For instance, if a college student is accused of a campus crime, it may
require communication and coordination among the dean of academic
affairs, the dean of students, the registrar, the director of security, and
the student’s advisor.
c. All command groups are also task groups, but the reverse need not be
true.

An interest group. People who affiliate to attain a specific objective with
which each is concerned.
a. Employees who band together to have their vacation schedules altered
b. Friendship groups often develop because the individual members have
one or more common characteristics.
c. Social alliances, which frequently extend outside the work situation,
can be based on similar age or ethnic heritage.

Informal groups satisfy their members’ social needs.
a. These types of interactions among individuals, even though informal,
deeply affect their behavior and performance.
b. There is no single reason why individuals join groups.
c. Exhibit 8-1 summarizes the most popular reasons people have for
joining groups.
164
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
Stages of Group Development
A. The Five-Stage Model
Notes:
1. Forming:

Characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose,
structure, and leadership.

Members are trying to determine what types of behavior are acceptable.

Stage is complete when members have begun to think of themselves as
part of a group.
2. Storming:

One of intragroup conflict. Members accept the existence of the group, but
there is resistance to constraints on individuality.

Conflict over who will control the group.

When complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership
within the group.
3. Norming:

One in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates
cohesiveness.

There is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie.

Stage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group has
assimilated a common set of expectations of what defines correct member
behavior.
4. Performing:

The structure at this point is fully functional and accepted.

Group energy has moved from getting to know and understand each other
to performing.

For permanent work groups, performing is the last stage in their
development.
5. Adjourning:

For temporary committees, teams, task forces, and similar groups that
have a limited task to perform, there is an adjourning stage.

In this stage, the group prepares for its disbandment. Attention is directed
toward wrapping up activities.

Responses of group members vary in this stage. Some are upbeat,
basking in the group’s accomplishments. Others may be depressed over
the loss of camaraderie and friendships.
6. Many assume that a group becomes more effective as it progresses through
the first four stages. While generally true, what makes a group effective is
more complex. Under some conditions, high levels of conflict are conducive to
high group performance.
165
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
A. The Five-Stage Model (cont.)
Notes:
7. Groups do not always proceed clearly from one stage to the next. Sometimes
several stages go on simultaneously, as when groups are storming and
performing. Groups even occasionally regress to previous stages.
8. Another problem is that it ignores organizational context. For instance, a study
of a cockpit crew in an airliner found that, within ten minutes, three strangers
assigned to fly together for the first time had become a high-performing group.
9. The strong organizational context provides the rules, task definitions,
information, and resources needed for the group to perform.
B. An Alternative Model: For Temporary Groups with Deadlines
1. Temporary groups with deadlines do not seem to follow the previous model.
Their pattern is called the punctuated-equilibrium model. Studies indicate their
own unique sequencing. (Exhibit 8-3).
2. Phase I—The first meeting sets the group’s direction; the first inertia phase. A
framework of behavioral patterns and assumptions emerges. These lasting
patterns can appear as early as the first few seconds of the group’s life can.
3. Then a transition takes place when the group has used up half its allotted time.

The group’s direction becomes fixed and is unlikely to be reexamined
throughout the first half of the group’s life.

The group tends to stand still or become locked into a fixed course of
action.

The group is incapable of acting on new insights in Phase 1.
4. The midpoint appears to work like an alarm clock, heightening members’
awareness that their time is limited and that they need to “get moving.” A
transition initiates major changes.
5. This ends Phase 1 and is characterized by a concentrated burst of changes,
dropping of old patterns, and adoption of new perspectives. The transition sets
a revised direction for Phase 2.
6. Phase 2 is a new equilibrium or period of inertia. In this phase, the group
executes plans created during the transition period.
7. The group’s last meeting is characterized by markedly accelerated activity.
8. The punctuated-equilibrium model characterizes groups as exhibiting long
periods of inertia interspersed with brief revolutionary changes triggered
primarily by their members’ awareness of time and deadlines.
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the POINT-COUNTER POINT—All Jobs
Should Be Designed Around Groups found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes. A suggestion for a
class exercise follows the introduction of the material below.
166
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
Toward Explaining Work Group Behavior
A. External Conditions Imposed on the Group
Notes:
1. The work group is a subsystem embedded in a larger system. It does not exist
in isolation, but are a part of the larger organization. External condition’s are
imposed on a work group.
2. External conditions include:

An organization’s overall strategy, typically put into place by top
management, outlines the organization’s goals and the means for attaining
these goals.

The strategy will influence the power of various work groups which will
determine the resources that the organization’s top management is willing
to allocate to it for performing its tasks.

Organizations have authority structures that define who reports to whom,
who makes decisions, and what decisions individuals or groups are
empowered to make.

Organizations create rules, procedures, policies, job descriptions, and
other forms of formal regulations to standardize employee behavior.

The more formal regulations that the organization imposes on all its
employees, the more the behavior of work group members will be
consistent and predictable.

The presence or absence of resources such as money, time, raw
materials, and equipment—which are allocated to the group by the
organization—have a large bearing on the group’s behavior.

The performance evaluation and reward system. Group members’
behavior will be influenced by how the organization evaluates performance
and what behaviors are rewarded.

Every organization has an unwritten culture that defines standards of
acceptable and unacceptable behavior for employees. Members of work
groups have to accept the standards implied in the organization’s dominant
culture if they are to remain in good standing.

The physical work setting creates both barriers and opportunities for work
group interaction.
Group Member Resources
A. Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities
Notes:
1. Part of a group’s performance can be predicted by assessing the knowledge,
skills, and abilities of its individual members.
2. A group’s performance is not merely the summation of its individual members’
abilities, but these abilities set parameters for what members can do and how
effectively they will perform in a group.
3. A review of the evidence has found that interpersonal skills consistently
emerge as important for high work group performance. These include: conflict
management and resolution, collaborative problem solving, and
communication.
167
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
B. Personality Characteristics
Notes:
1. There has been a great deal of research on the relationship between
personality traits and group attitudes and behavior.
2. The general conclusion:
 Attributes that have a positive connotation in our culture tend to be
positively related to group productivity, morale, and cohesiveness.

These include: sociability, initiative, openness, and flexibility.

Negatively evaluated characteristics such as authoritarianism, dominance,
and unconventionality tend to be negatively related to the dependent
variables.
3. No one personality characteristic is a good predictor of group behavior.
Group Structure
Notes:
1. Formal Leadership



Almost every work group has a formal leader.
Typically identified by title
This leader can play an important part in the group’s success—Chapter 11
& 12 reviews the research.
2. Roles




All group members are actors, each playing a role.
“A set of expected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a
given position in a social unit.”
We are required to play a number of diverse roles, both on and off our
jobs. Many of these roles are compatible; some create conflicts.
Different groups impose different role requirements on individuals.
3. Role identity


There are certain attitudes and actual behaviors consistent with a role, and
they create the role identity.
People have the ability to shift roles rapidly when they recognize that the
situation and its demands clearly require major changes.
4. Role perception



One’s view of how one is supposed to act in a given situation is a role
perception.
We get these perceptions from stimuli all around us—friends, books,
movies, television.
The primary reason that apprenticeship programs exist is to allow
beginners to watch an “expert,” so that they can learn to act as they are
supposed to.
5. Role expectations


How others believe you should act in a given situation
How you behave is determined to a large extent by the role defined in the
context in which you are acting.
168
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
Group Structure (cont.)


Notes:
When role expectations are concentrated into generalized categories, we
have role stereotypes.
The psychological contract is an unwritten agreement that exists between
employees and their employer.
a. It sets out mutual expectations—what management expects from
workers, and vice versa.
b. It defines the behavioral expectations that go with every role.
c. If role expectations as implied are not met, expect negative
repercussions from the offended party.
6. Role conflict:




“When an individual is confronted by divergent role expectations”
It exists when compliance with one role requirement may make more
difficult the compliance with another.
All of us have faced and will continue to face role conflicts. The critical
issue is how conflicts imposed by divergent expectations impact on
behavior.
They increase internal tension and frustration.
A. An experiment: Zimbardo’s Simulated Prison
Notes:
1. Conducted by Stanford University psychologist Philip Zimbardo and associates.
They created a “prison” in the basement of the Stanford psychology building.
2. They hired two-dozen emotionally stable, physically healthy, law-abiding
students who scored “normal average” on extensive personality tests. Each
student was randomly assigned the role of “guard” or “prisoner.”
3. To get the experiment off to a “realistic” start, Zimbardo got the cooperation of
the City of Palo Alto Police Department:


Police went, unannounced, to the future prisoners’ homes, arrested and
handcuffed them, put them in a squad car in front of friends and neighbors,
and took them to police headquarters where they were booked and
fingerprinted.
From there, they were taken to the Stanford prison.
4. At the start of the planned two-week experiment, there were no measurable
differences between those assigned to be guards and those chosen to be
prisoners.



The guards received no special training in how to be prison guards.
They were told only to “maintain law and order” in the prison and not to
take any nonsense.
Physical violence was forbidden.
5. To simulate further the realities of prison life, the prisoners were allowed visits.
6. Mock guards worked eight-hour shifts; the mock prisoners were kept in their
cells around the clock and were allowed out only for meals, exercise, toilet
privileges, head-count lineups, and work details.
169
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
A. An experiment: Zimbardo’s Simulated Prison (cont.)
Notes:
7. It took the “prisoners” little time to accept the authority positions of the guards,
or the mock guards to adjust to their new authority roles.


After the guards crushed a rebellion, the prisoners became increasingly
passive.
The prisoners actually began to believe and act as if they were inferior and
powerless.
8. Every guard, at some time during the simulation, engaged in abusive,
authoritative behavior. Not one prisoner said, “Stop this. I am a student like
you. This is just an experiment!”
9. The simulation actually proved too successful in demonstrating how quickly
individuals learn new roles. The researchers had to stop the experiment after
only six days because of the pathological reactions that the participants were
demonstrating.
10. What should you conclude from this prison simulation?

The participants had learned stereotyped conceptions of guard and
prisoner roles from the mass media and their own personal experiences in
power and powerless relationships at home.

This allowed them easily and rapidly to assume roles that were very
different from their inherent personalities.
B. Norms
1. All groups have norms—“acceptable standards of behavior that are shared by
the group’s members.” Norms tell members what they ought and ought not to
do under certain circumstances.
2. A work group’s norms are unique, yet there are still some common classes of
norms.

Performance norms are probably the most common class of norms.
a. Explicit cues on how hard they should work, how to get the job done,
their level of output, appropriate levels of tardiness, and the like
b. These norms are extremely powerful in affecting an individual
employee’s performance.

Appearance norms include things like appropriate dress, loyalty to the
work group or organization, when to look busy, and when it is acceptable
to goof off.

Social arrangement norms come from informal work groups and primarily
regulate social interactions within the group.

Allocation of resources norms can originate in the group or in the
organization.
170
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
B. Norms
Notes:
3. Conformity

There is considerable evidence that groups can place strong pressures on
individual members to change their attitudes and behaviors to conform to
the group’s standard.

Individuals conform to the important groups to which they belong or hope
to belong. However, all groups do not impose equal conformity pressures
on their members. Important groups are referred to as reference groups.

The reference group is characterized as one where the person is aware of
the others; the person defines himself or herself as a member, or would
like to be a member; and the person feels that the group members are
significant to him/her.

The pressure that group exerts for conformity was demonstrated by
Solomon Asch. (See Exhibit 8-5 & 6). Groups of seven or eight people
were asked to compare two cards held by the experimenter. One card had
one line, the other had three lines of varying length. Under ordinary
conditions, subjects made fewer than one percent errors.

Will the pressures to conform result in an unsuspecting subject (USS)
altering his/her answer to align with the others?

The experiment began with several sets of matching exercises. All the
subjects gave the right answers.

On the third set, however, the first subject gave an obviously wrong
answer, the next subject gave the same wrong answer, and so did the
others until it got to the unknowing subject.

The results obtained by Asch demonstrated that over many
experiments and many trials, subjects conformed in about 37% of the
trials; the subjects gave answers that they knew were wrong but that
were consistent with the replies of other group members.
4. Has time altered the validity of these findings of nearly 50 years ago, and are
they generalizable across cultures?

There have been changes in the level of conformity over time. Levels of
conformity have steadily declined.

Asch’s findings are culture-bound. Conformity to social norms is higher in
collectivist cultures than in individualistic cultures.
5. Deviant Workplace Behavior: this term covers a full range of antisocial actions
by organizational members that intentionally violate established norms and that
result in negative consequences for the organization, its members, or both.

Rudeness is on the rise and 12 percent of those who experienced it
actually quit their jobs.

When deviant workplace behavior occurs it can affect employee
commitment, cooperation, and motivation. This could lead to performance
issues and a lack of job satisfaction.
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the ETHICAL DILEMMA—Discrimination
in the Aftermath of September 11, 2001 found in the text and at the end of these notes
171
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
C. Status
Notes:
1. Status is a socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members
by others. We live in a class-structured society despite all attempts to make it
more egalitarian.
2. Status and norms:

High-status members of groups often are given more freedom to deviate
from norms than other group members.

High-status people also are better able to resist conformity pressures.

The previous findings explain why many star athletes, famous actors, topperforming salespeople, and outstanding academics seem oblivious to
appearance or social norms.
3. Status equity:

When inequity is perceived, it creates disequilibrium that results in
corrective behavior.

The trappings of formal positions are also important elements in
maintaining equity. Employees expect what an individual has and receives
to be congruent with his/her status. For example: pay, office space, etc.

Groups generally agree within themselves on status criteria.

Individuals can find themselves in a conflict situation when they move
between groups whose status criteria are different or when they join
groups whose members have heterogeneous backgrounds.
4. Status and culture:

Cultural differences affect status. For example, the French are highly
status conscious.

Countries differ on the criteria that create status:
a. Status for Latin Americans and Asians tends to be derived from family
position and formal roles held in organizations.
b. In the United States and Australia, it tends to be bestowed more on
accomplishments.

Make sure you understand who and what holds status when interacting
with people from a different culture than your own.
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the TEAM EXERCISE—Assessing
Occupational Status found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes. The purpose of the exercise is to
help students better understand the role occupation plays in beliefs about the status of individuals.
AND/OR:
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the OB IN THE NEWS—The New Status
Symbols” box found in the text and below. The purpose of the exercise is to replace popularly held notions with
research-based conclusions. A suggestion for a class exercise follows the introduction of the material below.
172
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
OB IN THE NEWS—The New Status Symbols
In the land of plenty, we have always desired bigger and better stuff—be it a Rolex watch, a Mercedes
convertible, or a ski chalet in Switzerland. These status symbols have not disappeared but there are signs that
executives and professionals are redefining what connotes status among their ranks.
A couple of generations ago, what you drove, where you lived, and what you wore was used to convey
status. Expensive cars, for instance, were driven only by the rich. Times have changed. Easy credit and leasing
have made expensive automobiles accessible to the masses. Fifty-dollar knock-offs of $15,000 watches and $300
five-carat zircons that cannot be told from $100,000 diamonds make it easy for anyone to “look rich.” Since status
is typically associated with what is rare, and with material possessions increasingly available to the masses, the
things that historically connoted status do not work as well. Among major corporate executives, everyone has a
couple of homes and garages full of expensive cars. Nowadays, private jets are seen as major status symbols. A
$40 million Gulfstream V makes a statement. Of course, that is as long as you are not trying to “up” someone like
Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, who owns seven jets, including two Boeing 757s.
Among professionals, the latest status symbol appears to be free time. Why? Because in a wealthy and
overworked society, time, control, and work/life balance are true scarcities. When friends and colleagues feel
pressured to put in 60-plus hour work weeks, the individual who has the time to attend his kids’ after-school
soccer games, to go fishing on the weekends, or the freedom to do his work out of his home carries high status.
Source: Based on S. Caudron, “The New Status Symbols,” Industry Week, June 21, 1999, pp. 24–26.
Class Exercise:
1. This exercise will require you to go to the web site http://www.lili.org/isl/ltai/ThemesBooks/working.htm and
make copies of the essay for the class to read or it could be assigned as a lab activity.
2. The web page provides an essay to prompt discussion on the idea of the differences between “making a
living” and “making a life.”
3. Ask students to respond to the topics below that were raised in the essay. How are things different today than
what was traditionally accepted in their parents (or earlier) generation?
 Work time vs. leisure time
 Success and the American dream
 Equal opportunity in the work place
 What constitutes job satisfaction
 The demise of the "old" economy and the rise of the "new"
 "Work ethic" vs. ethics in the work place
4. These topics or themes could be used in discussion groups, class Q & A, short papers, or journal entries to
help the student begin to clarify his or her thoughts on these issues as they apply to his or her own current or
future career.
D. Size
Notes:
1. The size of a group affects the group’s overall behavior, but the effect depends
on the dependent variables:

Smaller groups are faster at completing tasks than are larger ones.

If the group is engaged in problem solving, large groups consistently do
better.

Large groups—a dozen or more members—are good for gaining diverse
input.

Smaller groups—seven members—are better at doing something
productive with that input.
2. Social loafing is the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working
collectively than when working individually.

A common stereotype about groups is that team spirit spurs individual
effort and enhances overall productivity.
173
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
D. Size (cont.)
Notes:

In the late 1920s, a German psychologist named Max Ringelmann
compared the results of individual and group performance on a ropepulling task.

Ringelmann’s results showed that groups of three people exerted a force
only two-and-a-half times the average individual performance. Groups of
eight collectively achieved less than four times the solo rate.

Increases in group size are inversely related to individual performance.

Replications of Ringelmann’s research generally support his findings.
3. Causes of social loafing:

A belief that others in the group are not carrying their fair share.

The dispersion of responsibility and the relationship between an
individual’s input and the group’s output is clouded.

There will be a reduction in efficiency where individuals think that their
contribution cannot be measured.
4. Implications for OB:

Where managers utilize collective work situations to enhance morale and
teamwork, they must also provide means by which individual efforts can be
identified.

It is not consistent with collective societies where individuals are motivated
by in-group goals. The Chinese and Israelis actually performed better in a
group than when working alone.
5. Other conclusions about groups:

Groups with an odd number of members tend to be preferable.

Groups made up of five or seven members do a pretty good job of
exercising the best elements of both small and large groups.
E. Composition
Notes:
1. Most group activities require a variety of skills and knowledge.
2. Research studies generally substantiate that heterogeneous groups—those
composed of dissimilar individuals—are more likely to have diverse abilities
and information and should be more effective, especially on cognitive,
creativity-demanding tasks.
3. The group may be more conflict laden and less expedient. Essentially, diversity
promotes conflict, which stimulates creativity, which leads to improved decision
making.
4. Diversity created by racial or national differences interferes with group
processes, at least in the short term. Why?

Cultural diversity seems to be an asset on tasks that call for a variety of
viewpoints.

Such groups have more difficulty in learning to work with each other and
solving problems.
174
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
E. Composition (cont.)

Notes:
These difficulties seem to dissipate with time as it takes time for diverse
groups to learn how to work through disagreements and different
approaches to solving problems.
5. An offshoot of the composition issue is the degree to which members of a
group share a common demographic attribute and the impact of this attribute
on turnover.
6. Groups and organizations are composed of cohorts, which we define as
“individuals who hold a common attribute.”
7. Group demography should help us to predict turnover:

Turnover will be greater among those with dissimilar experiences because
communication is more difficult.

Conflict and power struggles are more likely, and more severe when they
occur.

This makes group membership less attractive, so employees are more
likely to quit.
8. Studies have sought to test this thesis, and the evidence is quite encouraging:

Work groups, where a large portion of members entered at the same time,
have lowered turnover.

Where there are large gaps between cohorts, turnover is higher.

Discontinuities or bulges in the group’s date-of-entry distribution are likely
to result in a higher turnover rate within that group.
9. The implication is that the composition of a group may be an important
predictor of turnover.
10. We can speculate that variance within a group in respect to attributes other
than date of entry, such as social background, gender differences, and levels
of education, might similarly create discontinuities or bulges in the distribution
that will encourage some members to leave.
F. Cohesiveness
1. Groups differ in their cohesiveness, “the degree to which members are
attracted to each other and are motivated to stay in the group.”
2. Cohesiveness is important because it has been found to be related to the
group’s productivity. (See Exhibit 8-7).
3. The relationship of cohesiveness and productivity depends on the
performance-related norms established by the group:

If performance-related norms are high, a cohesive group will be more
productive.

If cohesiveness is high and performance norms are low, productivity will be
low.
175
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
F. Cohesiveness (cont.)
Notes:
4. How to encourage group cohesiveness:







Make the group smaller.
Encourage agreement with group goals.
Increase the time members spend together.
Increase the status of the group and the perceived difficulty of attaining
membership in the group.
Stimulate competition with other groups.
Give rewards to the group rather than to individual members.
Physically isolate the group.
Group Processes
Notes:
1. Synergy is a term used in biology that refers to “an action of two or more
substances that results in an effect that is different from the individual
summation of the substances.”
2. Synergy is contrasted with social loafing, which represents negative synergy.
The whole is less than the sum of its parts.
3. Research teams draw on the diverse skills of various individuals to produce
more meaningful research as a group than could be generated by all of the
researchers working independently. They produce positive synergy.
4. Social facilitation effect refers to this tendency for performance to improve or
decline in response to the presence of others.

While this effect is not entirely a group phenomenon, the group situation is
more likely to provide the conditions for social facilitation to occur.

The research on social facilitation tells us that the performance of simple,
routine tasks tends to be sped up and made more accurate by the
presence of others.

Where the work is more complex, requiring closer attention, the presence
of others is likely to have a negative effect on performance.

The implications relate to learning and training. People seem to perform
better on a task in the presence of others if that task is very well learned,
but poorer if it is not well learned.
A. Group Tasks
Notes:
1. The size-performance relationship is moderated by the group’s task
requirements.
Factors effecting group effectiveness when performing tasks:

The impact of group processes on the group’s performance and member
satisfaction is also moderated by the tasks that the group is doing.

The evidence indicates that the complexity and interdependence of tasks
influence the group’s effectiveness.

Tasks can be generalized as either simple or complex. Complex tasks are
ones that tend to be novel or non-routine.
176
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
A. Group Tasks (cont.)
Notes:

The more complex the task, the more the group will benefit from
discussion of alternatives.

If there is a high degree of interdependence among the tasks that group
members must perform, they will need to interact more.

For simple tasks that are routine and standardized, group members can
rely on standardized operating procedures for doing the job.

Tasks that have higher uncertainty—those that are complex and
interdependent—require more information processing.
Group Decision Making
A. Group vs. the Individual
Notes:
1. Strengths of group decision-making:





Groups generate more complete information and knowledge.
They offer increased diversity of views.
This opens up the opportunity for more approaches and alternatives to be
considered.
The evidence indicates that a group will almost always outperform even
the best individual.
Groups lead to increased acceptance of a solution.
2. Weaknesses of group decision-making:




They are time consuming.
There is conformity pressures in groups.
Group discussion can be dominated by one or a few members.
Group decisions suffer from ambiguous responsibility.
3. Effectiveness and efficiency:






Whether groups are more effective than individuals depends on the criteria
you use.
In terms of accuracy, group decisions will tend to be more accurate.
On the average, groups make better-quality decisions than individuals.
If decision effectiveness is defined in terms of speed, individuals are
superior.
If creativity is important, groups tend to be more effective than individuals.
If effectiveness means the degree of acceptance the final solution
achieves, groups are better.
4. In terms of efficiency, groups almost always stack up as a poor second to the
individual decision maker. The exceptions tend to be those instances where, to
achieve comparable quantities of diverse input, the single decision maker must
spend a great deal of time reviewing files and talking to people.
177
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
A. Group vs. the Individual (cont.)
Notes:
5. Summary:




Groups offer an excellent vehicle for performing many of the steps in the
decision-making process.
They are a source of both breadth and depth of input for information
gathering.
When the final solution is agreed upon, there are more people in a group
decision to support and implement it.
Group decisions consume time, create internal conflicts, and generate
pressures toward conformity.
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the MYTH OR SCIENCE—“Two Heads
are Better Than One.” box found in the text. The purpose of the exercise is to replace popularly held notions with
research-based conclusions. A suggestion for a class exercise follows the introduction of the material below.
MYTH OR SCIENCE? – “Two Heads Are Better Than One”
This statement is mostly true if “better” means that two people will come up with more original and
workable answerers to a problem than one person working alone.
The evidence generally confirms the superiority of groups over individuals in terms of decision-making
quality. Groups usually produce more and better solutions to problems than do individuals working alone. The
choices groups make will be more accurate and creative. Groups bring more complete information and knowledge
to a decision, so they generate more ideas. In addition, the give-and-take that typically takes place in group
decision processes provides diversity of opinion and increases the likelihood that weak alternatives will be
identified and abandoned.
Research indicates that certain conditions favor groups over individuals. They include: 1) Diversity
among members, 2) The group members must be able to communicate their ideas freely and openly, and 3) The
task being undertaken is complex.
Class Exercise:
1. This will require you to buy Lego® blocks or borrow them from your children. 
2. Create a simple model—a building, a plane, whatever—because you need to provide Legos to each team and
individual to recreate it. Three-to-eight sets.
3. Count the number of Legos, diagram the model, noting both the location, size, and color of the Legos. This
will be your master.
4. Select two teams of three-to-five, and at least three individuals. The rest of the class will observe and help
you.
5. Give the groups and the individuals the same instructions on the exercise. Ask them to tell you when they
have completed the task.
6. Select one student to create a time chart on the board and record when each unit—group or individual—
begins to build and their completion time.
7. Select two students to be “certifiers”; they will go to the individual or team when they are done and certify the
accuracy of their model.
8. Select one student to monitor the model, which needs to be outside of the class, in another location.
Instructions:
1. This is a timed exercise. They have 30 minutes. The goal is to recreate the model accurately and quickly.
2. They must visit the model in another room. They may not touch it, but they may sketch it.
3. Teams may assign responsibilities any way they desire; all members may view the model, but only one at a
time.
4. Once they are ready to replicate the model they must notify you, and they may NOT return to the model again.
5. They must build their replicates in your classroom and cannot take the Legos with them. (cont.)
178
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
MYTH OR SCIENCE? – “Two Heads Are Better Than One” (cont.)
Discussion
1.
2.
3.
4.
When you call time, some will be done, some will not, and some will be lost.
Discuss what type of task this was—complex or simple.
Note the performance, time, and accuracy.
Discuss with the class why things turned out as they did. What happened in the groups?
Note to instructor: Generally, teams will be more accurate but take more time. Sometimes, you will get an
individual with a photographic memory who will beat everyone.
A. Groupthink and Groupshift
Notes:
1. Groupthink and groupshift are two by-products of group decision-making.
Briefly, the differences between the two are:
2. Groupthink is related to norms:

It describes situations in which group pressures for conformity deter the
group from critically appraising unusual, minority, or unpopular views.

Groupthink is a disease that attacks many groups and can dramatically
hinder performance.
3. Groupshift

It indicates that, in discussing a given set of alternatives and arriving at a
solution, group members tend to exaggerate the initial positions that they
held. In some situations, caution dominates, and there is a conservative
shift.

The evidence indicates that groups tend toward a risky shift. Let us look at
each of these phenomena in more detail.
B. Groupthink
1. The phenomenon that occurs when group members become so enamored of
seeking concurrence is that the norm for consensus overrides the realistic
appraisal of alternative courses of action and the full expression of deviant,
minority, or unpopular views.
2. It is a deterioration in an individual’s mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral
judgment as a result of group pressures.
3. Symptoms of Groupthink include:




Group members rationalize any resistance to the assumptions they have
made.
Members apply direct pressures on those who momentarily express
doubts.
Those members who hold differing points of view seek to avoid deviating
from group consensus by keeping silent.
There appears to be an illusion of unanimity.
179
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
B. Groupthink (cont.)
4. In studies of historic American foreign policy decisions, these symptoms were
found to prevail when government policy-making groups failed. Examples:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Unpreparedness at Pearl Harbor in 1941
The U.S. invasion of North Korea
The Bay of Pigs fiasco
The escalation of the Vietnam War
The Challenger space shuttle disaster
The failure of the main mirror on the Hubble telescope
5. Groupthink appears to be closely aligned with the conclusions Asch drew from
his experiments on the lone dissenter. The results where that individuals who
hold a position different from the majority are put under pressure to suppress
or change their true beliefs.
6. Groupthink does not attack all groups. It occurs most often where there is a
clear group identity, where members hold a positive image of their group which
they want to protect, and where the group perceives a collective threat to this
positive image.
7. How to minimize groupthink:



Encourage group leaders to play an impartial role.
Appoint one group member to play the role of devil’s advocate.
Utilize exercises that stimulate active discussion of diverse alternatives
without threatening the group and intensifying identity protection.
C. Groupshift
1. In some cases, the group decisions are more conservative than the individual
decisions. More often, however, the shift is toward greater risk.
2. What appears to happen in groups is that the discussion leads to a significant
shift in the positions of members toward a more extreme position in the
direction in which they were already leaning before the discussion.
Conservatives become more cautious, and the more aggressive take on more
risk.
3. The groupshift can be viewed as actually a special case of groupthink. The
decision of the group reflects the dominant decision-making norm that
develops during the group’s discussion.
4. The greater occurrence of the shift toward risk has generated several
explanations:

Discussion creates familiarization among the members. As they become
more comfortable with each other, they also become more bold and
daring.

Most first-world societies value risk. We admire individuals who are willing
to take risks. Group discussion motivates members to show that they are
at least as willing as their peers to take risks.

The most plausible explanation of the shift toward risk, however, seems to
be that the group diffuses responsibility.

Group decisions free any single member from accountability for the
group’s final choice.
180
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
C. Groupshift (cont.)
Notes:
5. Implications of Groupshift:


Recognize that group decisions exaggerate the initial position of the
individual members.
The shift has been shown more often to be toward greater risk.
D. Group Decision-Making Techniques
1. Most Group Decision Making Takes Place in Interacting Groups
(See Exhibit 8-10):

In these groups, members meet face to face and rely on both verbal and
nonverbal interaction to communicate with each other.

Interacting groups often censor themselves and pressure individual
members toward conformity of opinion.

Brainstorming, the nominal group technique, and electronic meetings have
been proposed as ways to reduce many of the problems inherent in the
traditional interacting group.
2. Brainstorming:

It is meant to overcome pressures for conformity in the interacting group
that retard the development of creative alternatives.

In a typical brainstorming session, a half dozen to a dozen people sit
around a table.

The process:
a. The group leader states the problem clearly.
b. Members then “free-wheel” as many alternatives as they can in a given
length of time.
c. No criticism is allowed, and all the alternatives are recorded for later
discussion and analysis.
d. One idea stimulates others, and group members are encouraged
to “think the unusual.”
3. The nominal group technique:

Restricts discussion or interpersonal communication during the decisionmaking process

Group members are all physically present, but members operate
independently.

Specifically, a problem is presented, and then the following steps take
place:
a. Members meet as a group but, before any discussion takes place,
each member independently writes down his or her ideas on the
problem.
b. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to the group.
Each member takes his or her turn.
c. The group now discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them.
d. Each group member silently and independently rank-orders the ideas.
e. The idea with the highest aggregate ranking determines the final
decision.
181
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
D. Group Decision-Making Techniques (cont.)

Notes:
The chief advantage of the nominal group technique is that it permits the
group to meet formally but does not restrict independent thinking, as does
the interacting group.
4. The computer-assisted group or electronic meeting blends the nominal group
technique with sophisticated computer technology.




Up to 50 people sit around a horseshoe-shaped table, empty except for a
series of computer terminals.
Issues are presented to participants, and they type their responses onto
their computer screen.
Individual comments, as well as aggregate votes, are displayed on a
projection screen.
The major advantages of electronic meetings are anonymity, honesty, and
speed.
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW
1. Compare and contrast command, task, interest, and friendship groups.
Answer – A group is defined as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have come
together to achieve particular objectives. Groups can be either formal or informal. It is possible to sub-classify
groups as command, task, interest, or friendship groups.
 A command group is determined by the organization chart. It is composed of direct reports to a given
manager.
 Task groups—organizationally determined, represent those working together to complete a job task.
A task group’s boundaries are not limited to its immediate hierarchical superior. It can cross command
relationships. For instance, if a college student is accused of a campus crime, it may require
communication and coordination among the dean of academic affairs, the dean of students, the registrar,
the director of security, and the student’s advisor. All command groups are also task groups, but the
reverse need not be true.
 An interest group is people who affiliate to attain a specific objective with which each is concerned.
Employees who band together to have their vacation schedules altered.
 Friendship groups often develop because the individual members have one or more common
characteristics. Social alliances, which frequently extend outside the work situation, can be based on
similar age or ethnic heritage.
2. What might motivate you to join a group?
Answer – Informal groups satisfy their members’ social needs. There is no single reason why individuals join
groups. Exhibit 8-1 summarizes the most popular reasons people have for joining groups.
3. Describe the five-stage group-development model.
Answer – Exhibit 8-2 shows the five-stage group-development model:
 The first stage is forming.
Characterized by a great deal of uncertainty about the group’s purpose, structure, and leadership.
Members are trying to determine what types of behavior are acceptable.
Stage is complete when members have begun to think of themselves as part of a group.
 The second stage is storming.
One of intragroup conflict
Members accept the existence of the group, but there is resistance to constraints on individuality.
There is conflict over who will control the group
When complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership within the group.
 The third stage is norming.
One in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates cohesiveness.
There is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie.
182
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
The stage is complete when the group structure solidifies and the group has assimilated a common set of
expectations of what defines correct member behavior.
 The fourth stage is performing.
The structure at this point is fully functional and accepted.
Group energy has moved from getting to know and understand each other to performing.
4. What is the relationship between a work group and the organization of which it is a part?
Answer – An organization’s overall strategy, typically put into place by top management, outlines the
organization’s goals and the means for attaining these goals. The strategy will influence the power of various
work groups, which will determine the resources that the organization’s top management is willing to allocate
to it for performing its tasks. Organizations have authority structures that define who reports to whom, who
makes decisions, and what decisions individuals or groups are empowered to make. Organizations create
rules, procedures, policies, job descriptions, and other forms of formal regulations to standardize employee
behavior. The presence or absence of resources such as money, time, raw materials, and equipment—which
are allocated to the group by the organization—have a large bearing on the group’s behavior. The criteria that
an organization uses in its selection process will determine the kinds of people that will be in its work groups.
The performance evaluation and reward system. Group members’ behavior will be influenced by how the
organization evaluates performance and what behaviors are rewarded. Every organization has an unwritten
culture that defines standards of acceptable and unacceptable behavior for employees. Members of work
groups have to accept the standards implied in the organization’s dominant culture if they are to remain in
good standing. The physical work setting creates both barriers and opportunities for work group interaction.
5. What are the implications of Zimbardo’s prison experiment for OB?
Answer – The simulation actually proved too successful in demonstrating how quickly individuals learn new
roles. The researchers had to stop the experiment after only six days because of the pathological reactions
that the participants were demonstrating.
The participants had learned stereotyped conceptions of guard and prisoner roles from the mass media and
their own personal experiences in power and powerless relationships at home. This allowed them easily and
rapidly to assume roles that were very different from their inherent personalities.
6. Explain the implications from the Asch experiments.
Answer – The results obtained by Asch demonstrated that over many experiments and many trials, subjects
conformed in about 35 percent of the trials; the subjects gave answers that they knew were wrong but that
were consistent with the replies of other group members.
There have been changes in the level of conformity over time. Levels of conformity have steadily declined.
Asch’s findings are culture-bound. Conformity to social norms is higher in collectivist cultures than in
individualistic cultures.
7. How are status and norms related?
Answer – All groups have norms—acceptable standards of behavior that are shared by the group’s
members. Norms tell members what they ought and ought not to do under certain circumstances. Norms are
important because they:
 Facilitate the group’s survival.
 Increase the predictability of group members’ behaviors.
 Reduce embarrassing interpersonal problems for group members.
 Allow members to express the central values of the group and clarify what is distinctive about the group’s
identity.
There is considerable evidence that groups can place strong pressures on individual members to change their
attitudes and behaviors to conform to the group’s standard.
Status is a socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members by others. We live in a classstructured society despite all attempts to make it more egalitarian. High-status members of groups often are
given more freedom to deviate from norms than other group members. High-status people also are better
able to resist conformity pressures. The previous findings explain why many star athletes, famous actors, topperforming salespeople, and outstanding academics seem oblivious to appearance or social norms.
8. When do groups make better decisions than individuals?
183
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
Answer – The answer is, “it depends.” Groups are more effective in terms of accuracy and often make better
quality decisions than the individual. They also tend to have more creative decisions. However, in terms of
speed and efficiency, individuals are more effective.
9. How can a group’s demography help you to predict turnover?
Answer – An offshoot of the composition issue is the degree to which members of a group share a common
demographic attribute and the impact of this attribute on turnover. The individual’s attribute is in relationship to
the attributes of others with whom he/she works. Groups and organizations are composed of cohorts, which
we define as individuals who hold a common attribute. Group demography should help us to predict turnover.
Turnover will be greater among those with dissimilar experiences because communication is more difficult.
Conflict and power struggles are more likely, and more severe when they occur. This makes group
membership less attractive, so employees are more likely to quit. The implication is that the composition of a
group may be an important predictor of turnover.
10. What is groupthink? What is its effect on decision-making quality?
Answer – Groupthink describes situations in which group pressures for conformity deter the group from
critically appraising unusual, minority, or unpopular views. The phenomenon that occurs when group
members become so enamored of seeking concurrence that the norm for consensus overrides the realistic
appraisal of alternative courses of action and the full expression of deviant, minority, or unpopular views. It is
184
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
a deterioration in an individual’s mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment as a result of group
pressures. Group members rationalize any resistance to the assumptions they have made. Members apply
direct pressures on those who momentarily express doubts. Those members who hold differing points of view
seek to avoid deviating from group consensus by keeping silent. There appears to be an illusion of unanimity.
In studies of historic American foreign policy decisions, these symptoms were found to prevail when
government policy-making groups failed. Groupthink appears to be closely aligned with the conclusions Asch
drew from his experiments. Groupthink does not attack all groups. It occurs most often where there is a clear
group identity, where members hold a positive image of their group which they want to protect, and where the
group perceives a collective threat to this positive image.
QUESTIONS FOR CRITICAL THINKING
1. How could you use the punctuated-equilibrium model to better understand group behavior?
Answer – Temporary groups with deadlines do not seem to follow the traditional model. Their pattern is
called the punctuated-equilibrium model. Shown in Exhibit 8-3. Studies indicate their own unique sequencing.
The punctuated-equilibrium model characterizes groups as exhibiting long periods of inertia interspersed with
brief revolutionary changes triggered primarily by their members’ awareness of time and deadlines.
2. Identify five roles you play. What behaviors do they require? Are any of these roles in conflict? If so, in what
way? How do you resolve these conflicts?
Answer – Students’ answers will vary. Some suggested roles: student, sibling, child, adult, group leader,
member of a social group, etc. Behaviors and conflicts will vary with role.
3. “High cohesiveness in a group leads to higher group productivity.” Do you agree or disagree? Explain.
Answer – Groups differ in their cohesiveness—the degree to which members are attracted to each other and
are motivated to stay in the group. Cohesiveness is important because it has been found to be related to the
group’s productivity. The relationship of cohesiveness and productivity depends on the performance-related
norms established by the group. If performance-related norms are high, a cohesive group will be more
productive, but if cohesiveness is high and performance norms are low, productivity will be low. See Exhibit
8-7. Students’ responses will vary based on their perception and integration of the above facts.
3. What effect, if any, do you expect that workforce diversity has on performance and satisfaction?
Answer – Research studies generally substantiate that heterogeneous groups—those composed of dissimilar
individuals—are more likely to have diverse abilities and information and should be more effective, especially
on cognitive, creativity-demanding tasks. The group may be more conflict laden and less expedient.
Essentially, diversity promotes conflict, which stimulates creativity, which leads to improved decision making.
Diversity created by racial or national differences interfere with group processes, at least in the short term.
Cultural diversity seems to be an asset on tasks that call for a variety of viewpoints. Such groups have more
difficulty in learning to work with each other and solving problems. These difficulties seem to dissipate with
time as it takes time for diverse groups to learn how to work through disagreements and different approaches
to solving problems.
5. If group decisions consistently achieve better quality outcomes than those achieved by individuals, how did
the phrase “a camel is a horse designed by a committee” become so popular and ingrained in the culture?
Answer – Students’ responses will vary. Generally, two main factors may have contributed to this mythology.
The first is that individuals may blame the group for poor decisions, when in fact the decision was the result of
a dominant member of the group. Second, there have been some colossal public screw-ups attributable to
group decisions and the groupthink phenomenon.
185
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
POINT-COUNTERPOINT – All Jobs Should Be Designed around Groups
POINT
Groups, not individuals, are the ideal building blocks for an organization. There are at least six reasons for
designing all jobs around groups.
 First, small groups are good for people. They can satisfy social needs and they can provide support for
employees in times of stress and crisis.
 Second, groups are good problem-finding tools. They are better than individuals in promoting creativity
and innovation.
 Third, in a wide variety of decision situations, groups make better decisions than individuals do.
 Fourth, groups are very effective tools for implementation. Groups gain commitment from their members
so that group decisions are likely to be willingly and more successfully carried out.
 Fifth, groups can control and discipline individual members in ways that are often extremely difficult
through impersonal quasi-legal disciplinary systems. Group norms are powerful control devices.
 Sixth, groups are a means by which large organizations can fend off many of the negative effects of
increased size. Groups help to prevent communication lines from growing too long, the hierarchy from
growing too steep, and the individual from getting lost in the crowd.
Given the above argument for the value of group based job design, what would an organization look like that
was truly designed around group functions? This might best be considered by merely taking the things that
organizations do with individuals and applying them to groups. Instead of hiring individuals, they would hire
groups. Similarly, they would train groups rather than individuals, pay groups rather than individuals, promote
groups rather than individuals, fire groups rather than individuals, and so on. The rapid growth of team-based
organizations over the past decade suggests we may well be on our way toward the day when almost all jobs are
designed around groups.
COUNTER POINT
Designing jobs around groups is consistent with socialistic doctrine. It might have worked well in the
former Soviet Union or Eastern European countries, but capitalistic countries like the United States, Canada,
Australia, and the United Kingdom value the individual. Designing jobs around groups is inconsistent with the
economic values of these countries. Moreover, as capitalism and entrepreneurship have spread throughout
Eastern Europe, we should expect to see less emphasis on groups and more on the individual in workplaces
throughout the world. Let us look at the United States to see how cultural and economic values shape employee
attitudes toward groups.
America was built on the ethic of the individual. Americans strongly value individual achievement. They
praise competition. Even in team sports, they want to identify individuals for recognition. Americans enjoy being
part of a group in which they can maintain a strong individual identity. They do not enjoy sublimating their identity
to that of the group.
The American worker likes a clear link between his or her individual effort and a visible outcome. It is not
by chance that the United States, as a nation, has a considerably larger proportion of high achievers than exists in
most of the world. America breeds achievers, and achievers seek personal responsibility. They would be
frustrated in job situations in which their contribution is commingled and homogenized with the contributions of
others.
Americans want to be hired, evaluated, and rewarded on their individual achievements. Americans
believe in an authority and status hierarchy. They accept a system in which there are bosses and subordinates.
They are not likely to accept a group’s decision on such issues as their job assignments and wage increases. It is
harder yet to imagine that they would be comfortable in a system in which the sole basis for their promotion or
termination would be the performance of their group.
G
Based on H. J. Leavitt, “Suppose We Took Groups Seriously,” in E. L. Cass and F. G. Zimmer (eds.), Man and Work in Society (New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1975), pp. 67–77.
D
Class Exercise:
1. Discuss group versus individual grading with students.
2. Begin by polling them as to whether they would prefer a grade for this class (or another specific class) based
on their individual effort or on the effort of a five-student group they belonged to. The class mix on this issue
will vary.
186
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
3. Move the group-based grade students into groups; leave the individual-based grade students. Have them
create a list of three-to-five of the reasons for their preference.
4. After 10–15 minutes, have the group-based students pick a spokesperson and have them record their lists of
the board. Once they are recorded, start an “individual” list by asking the individual students, one at a time, for
a reason, going round robin until you have all of their responses.
5. Now, as a class, compare and discuss the reasons. How are the lists different? The same? Is there a theme
or themes emerging (groups—safety in numbers, it is a hard class; individual—I want control of my grade,
etc.).
6. Ask students if they think the reasons that seem to be emerging would:
 Be acceptable to other students in other classes in your school
 Be acceptable to other students when it came time to interview for jobs
 A way to get ahead in their careers (group effort rather than individual effort being rewarded)
Alternate Class Exercises:
1. Start as the above with steps one through three, however, instead of having the groups/individuals create a
list, give them one-to-three short papers to grade. It (they) can be one(s) you wrote for this exercise or one
from a previous class with identifying marks removed. Each group/individual should all have the same items
to grade.
2. Give the assignment instructions and the learning objectives for the paper.
3. If possible, separate the individual graders from the group graders is separate rooms while they perform the
task. Ask them to record their start and end times on the assignment. Tell them that when they have
completed the task to wait where they are until you call them back into the room.
4. For the debrief, post your version of the graded assignment so students can compare their work with yours.
5. Discuss the issues of group decision making as applied to their task. Where were they effective or not? What
were the problems?
6. Ask if they would prefer this to what typically happens in the college classroom in terms of grading. Why or
why not?
OR:
7. Consider conducting a debate over the team concept and its implementation when you complete the content
of Chapters 8 and 9. Chapter 1 offers a format for a formal debate. Chapter 9 offers a less formal, entire class
format for the debate.
187
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
TEAM EXERCISE – Assessing Occupational Status
Purpose: To understand the influence of status and how individual perceptions of status vary.
Time: 40 minutes. Five-to-seven for completion of rankings, 35 minutes for discussion.
Instructions: Note—there is no correct ranking for these occupations; this is a discussion exercise, not a test.
1. Individually rank the following 20 occupations from most prestigious (1) to least prestigious (20).
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Accountant
Air traffic controller
Coach of a college football team
Coach of a college women’s basketball team
Criminal defense attorney
Electrical engineer
Environmental scientist
Firefighter
Investment Banker
Manager of a U.S. automobile plant
Mayor of a large city
Minister
Pharmacist
Physician
Plumber
Real estate salesperson
Sports agent
Teacher in a public elementary school
U.S. Army colonel
Used car salesperson
2. Form into groups of three to five students each.
3. Answer the following questions
 How closely did your top five choices (1–5) match?
 How closely did your bottom five choices (16–20) match?
 What occupations were generally easiest to rate? Which were most difficult? Why?
 What does this exercise tell you about criteria for assessing status?
 What does this exercise tell you about stereotypes?
Teaching notes
1. Exercise instructions are detailed above.
2. When students have finished, select a group to share the results of their discussion. Ask other groups how
their results compare or contrast to that group’s.
Ethical Dilemma—Discrimination in the Aftermath of September 11, 2001
Less than two months after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, security
officials at FedEx’s sorting center at Newark Airport became alarmed when they heard a rumor that one of the
company’s contract mechanics, Osama Sweilan, had been periodically disappearing into the company’s flightsimulator room. The security men quickly set up an interrogation at an off-site location. The Egyptian-born 35year-old Sweilan nervously explained how he sometimes would slip into the room to make sure a pipe he had
fixed was not leaking. He also made a few quick calls to his wife. Sometimes he even prayed. The FedEx people
pressed him further, asking about his beliefs regarding politics and Osama bin Laden. Afterward, they confiscated
his ID and told his outsourcing firm that he was no longer wanted in his 16-month-old job.
188
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
Organizations have a responsibility to know who is working for them, but how far does that responsibility
allow management to go? Although it is illegal for employers to discriminate, how should FedEx managers have
responded to the heightened wariness that many employees and customers felt toward anyone from the Arab
world after the terrorist attack? What can managers do if one or more of their employees is discriminating against
an Arab-American co-worker?
Class Exercise:
These Q & A ideas can be used as a class discussion, or you can break the class into small groups and debrief
as a class when time is up.
1. This case presents an interesting dilemma—safety considerations vs. basic rights such as nondiscrimination because of race, religion, etc.
2. Students will have a variety of responses, but the final conclusion should center around the employer’s
personnel policies around Sweilan’s behavior. Are there rules for who has access to the room, for taking
unauthorized time away from work, unauthorized phone calls, etc.
Additionally, are those policies being applied uniformly to every other worker? If not, then the argument
he is being discriminated against is stronger (although not necessarily illegal.)
3. What can managers do if one or more of their employees is discriminating against an Arab-American coworker?
Source: This dilemma is based on M. Conlin, “Taking Precautions—Or Harassing Workers?” Business Week, December 3, 2001, p. 84.
Case Incident—Analysis of a Group Decision at Time Warner
In the spring of 2000, Time Warner was finalizing its merger with America Online. With critics claiming
that this merger would create an unruly monopoly, you would have thought that Time Warner management would
have been particularly sensitive to its public image, but it made a decision on April 30 that would sorely tarnish
that image.
Time Warner was in the process of renegotiating its contract with Walt Disney to determine how much
Time Warner would pay for the use of three of Disney’s cable channels and whether Disney would renew Time
Warner’s right to carry the ABC network (ABC is owned by Disney). Negotiations had begun more than five
months earlier but were going nowhere. Deadlines had been extended seven times. Animosities were escalating
between Time Warner and Disney negotiators. By late April, face-to-face talks had ceased. Communication had
come down to the exchanges of nasty faxes.
On April 26, five days before the latest negotiating deadline, when Time Warner’s rights to carry the ABC
network were to expire, ABC faxed a terse letter to Time Warner notifying it that Disney expected Time Warner to
continue to carry the ABC signal through May 24 after the end of the sweeps period, when stations measure
audiences to determine what to charge advertisers. Time Warner had been insisting on an eight-month extension.
The tone of the fax set off the tempers of some Time Warner executives. They felt ABC was negotiating by fiat.
Within Time Warner, executives began considering blocking ABC’s signal to the 3.5 million homes that Time
Warner’s cable serviced. Some saw blocking the signal as a real risk. Given that cable companies are not popular
with the public and often seen as charging monopolistic prices, several Time Warner execs feared that they would
take the blame rather than Disney. Others argued that Disney, itself a huge conglomerate, might take just as
much blame, if not more, if Time Warner put its message out effectively, and they doubted ABC would take the
chance of losing up to $3 million a day in advertising revenues. They figured the threat of blocking ABC’s signal
might finally bring Disney to agree to Time Warner’s terms.
By Sunday, April 30, still no agreement had been reached. More terse faxes went back and forth. Neither
side would budge from its demands. By 8:30 P.M., Disney executives began to sense that Time Warner’s threat
to pull the ABC signal was real, though they still found it hard to believe. Meanwhile, Time Warner executives
were convinced that they had Disney cornered. “It is clear they did not think we would drop, and we did not think
they
189
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
would let us drop,” said Fred Dessler, a senior vice president at Time Warner and head of its negotiating team.
Finally, with no compromise offer from Disney, Time Warner executives felt there was no turning back.
Time Warner Cable’s president called the company’s CEO, Gerald Levin, and told him he was about to order his
engineers to block the ABC signal. Levin supported the decision. At 12:01 on Monday May 1, the ABC screen
went briefly to static, then the phrase “Disney has taken ABC away from you” appeared in bright yellow letters on
a blue screen.
Within 24 hours, the mayor of New York attacked Time Warner as a predatory monopoly. Disney
dispatched its lawyers to the Washington offices of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission, where they
requested that the commission force Time Warner to transmit its signals. Time Warner executives went to
Washington to plead their case before the FCC. It quickly became clear that the commission was siding with
Disney in this dispute. The next day, Tuesday, The New York Times published an editorial that said the threat to
Disney by a combined AOL and Time Warner was real. It now was becoming increasingly clear to Time Warner
executives that they were losing the public relations war.
Tuesday afternoon, after only 39 hours of blocking ABC’s signal, Time Warner called a news conference
and announced that it had offered Disney a six month extension of the negotiations. The following day the FCC
ruled that Time Warner had violated the law by blocking ABC from its system during a sweeps month.
Time Warner executives admitted afterward that they erred. They say they made a legal miscalculation
and also incorrectly assumed that Disney would back down. “Why did we decide to take a stand now?” asked
Dessler. “We thought it was the right time. They were just pushing us and pushing us.”
Questions:
Use these questions for a class Q & A or break the class into small groups for discussion.
1. What does this case say about the role of emotions in decision making?
2. How did “group forces” shape this decision?
3. What, if anything, could senior Time-Warner executives have done to have achieved a more effective
outcome in this process?
Source: Based on J. Rutenberg, “Reconstructing the Genesis of a Blunder,” New York Times, May 8, 2000, p. C20.
190
Robbins: Organizational Behavior
Chapter Eight
Exploring OB Topics on the World Wide Web
Search Engines are our navigational tool to explore the WWW. Some
commonly used search engines are:
www.goto.com
www.excite.com
www.hotbot.com
www.google.com
www.lycos.com
www.looksmart.com
1. Learn more about why people join groups, groupthink, group development, and other topics at
the Allyn & Bacon communication studies web site found at:
http://www.abacon.com/commstudies/index.html
Once there select the “small group” entry and then choose two or three more topics to read.
Choose the most interesting topic and take the interactive quiz. Email your results to the
instructor.
2. Groupthink can dramatically hinder performance, sometimes in disastrous ways. The
Challenger disaster, the Bay of Pigs Invasion, and The Vietnam Conflict have been subject to
groupthink. Learn more about the role groupthink played in these events. Go to:
http://www.css.edu/users/dswenson/web/TWAssoc/groupthink.html . Choose one of the events
mentioned on that page and write a short synopsis of how groupthink hindered the decision
making process. Bring your synopsis to class for discussion.
3. Team Traps. Team traps are vicious cycles of unproductive behavior that undermines group
performance. Visit http://www.pegasuscom.com/tstart1.html to read the article on Team Traps.
Print the article and bring it to class for discuss. Think about your own experiences in teams
and the 12 Team Traps noted in the article. Note two or three examples and bring to class with
the article for more discussion.
4. Brainstorming is a group technique to encourage the development of creative alternatives. Now
that we know what it is, how do we do? What would you do if you were called upon to lead a
brainstorming session? Visit this U.K. website for an overview on how to conduct a
brainstorming session http://www.brainstorming.co.uk/tutorials/preparingforbrainstorming.html .
You might also be interested in visiting the home page of this same site found at
http://www.brainstorming.co.uk/contents.html where you will find lots of creativity exercises,
puzzles, free training, articles and more. Make a list of the five most important things you must
do to prepare for a brainstorming session and bring it to class.
5. Learn about the nominal group technique and how to conduct one. The Teamwork Resources
website also has links for other team topics such as: the need for teams, roles, norms, etc. Go
to: http://www.ecac.unimelb.edu.au/project/team/mod2k.html to learn more. Write a journal
entry comparing NGT to brainstorming in terms of their differences, benefits, disadvantages,
and when the one is the best choice over the other.
6. What is the link between social loafing and group cohesiveness? Does one enhance or detract
from the other? Write a two page paper on the topic. Conduct a web page search with these
two terms. A place to start is: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlgroups16.html
and http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlgroups16.html .
7. Peer pressure can be a positive thing, it is really just a way to communicate group norms. To
learn more about how to use positive peer pressure to prevent binge drinking on campus visit:
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1997/10/27/feat/learning.2.html
191