In business world interaction of individuals has been a key factor at their success in terms of achieving their goals and also in the assurance of smooth running of their departments. Group dynamics has increased the effectiveness of those organizations through proper understanding of each individual through communication of the members. The leadership in the group dynamics is also a core value at the business performance depending on the perceptions of fellow members towards that leadership. This article analyses the group dynamics in terms of its importance, leadership, the leadership source and also interdependence in terms of making decisions for each and every member.
In group dynamics, people interact at a given environment which can either be in social environment business environment or in a social environment. Our main concern is in the business environment where group dynamics has been an important tool in organizations in enabling them to perform their duties and also achieve their goals effectively. The performances of businesses at the current situation are determined by the degree of the effectiveness of group interactions. These interactions are between individuals who working at the same level and those who are working at different levels of work in organization they are working for.
For instance individuals who are working at the same department are likely to do a better job if they have good relations to each other which can only be brought through group dynamics (Levi, 2001, p. 67). Group dynamics importance includes, first it enables employees to have a common goal as stipulated by the organization they are working for. Through group dynamic they will understand each other better like a friend and not a stranger.
Secondly it will enable all the individuals at the organization to view each other as a colleague since through group dynamics people will eliminate dominance of some members. Therefore all members will have a will an obligation to facilitate at the achieving companies objects. Companies/ organizations performances are highly depended on personalities of individuals who are working for that organization. Therefore for a good organization of a business we need to organize employees and all the stakeholders from the individual level through group dynamics (McNamara, 2010, p.
1). Finally it is advisable to use group dynamics since individuals tend to perform their duties better, especially if they are working with individuals whom they know and understand than people they don’t know Every business has its objectives as stipulated by the organizations charters and other legal documents of that organization. Therefore it is the main agenda of each and every business to achieve to those goals. Group dynamics has been great self drive for individuals in achieving the mutual goals of organizations. Positive interdependence enables individuals to put their individual efforts at their work which in turn facilitates the achievement of the organizations goals. Therefore interdependence gives people power to make decisions, monitor their performance therefore enable them dedicate their efforts so as to carry out their dedicated roles by the business. Interdependence makes each individual feel guilty if he/she has not done his/ her part therefore this serves as a drive for each member to deliver the part he/ she is allocated to do.
Although research on groups has always been helpful to the businesses sometimes it has proved unworthy especially if it does not touch key issues. In some business group dynamics does not perform a major role in achieving the goals and also in the smooth run of the organization. For instance in organizations where individual efforts are highly regarded than collective bargain, then involving group dynamics will destabilize the business as a whole since individuals who have a bigger role will tend to relax with a claim of equality or fair distribution of roles while those with relatively small role will tent to complain for additional roles added to them. In some cases if groups are taken on the negative side them the relevancy of the research will be questionable. If researches about groups are under influence of any parameter for instance culture, gender or even race in a diversity world there is likelihood of that research being irrelevant in the sense that it will try to avoid some key factors about that research of groups. In organizations where individuals have different interests then, with introduction of group dynamics may cause problems because each member has a different goal to work for. Both groups and individuals play important roles at the working environments at influencing the performance of businesses.
Although both are useful, each will be suitable at a given environment. For instance in a big company where group dynamics is more effective than using individual effort will destabilize the operations of a business while in organizations where individual efforts are highly effectively then incorporating group effort will also affect the smooth run of the organization. In most cases groups tend to be more effective than individual since most companies and other organization success is based on networking, therefore group dynamics is very important. In groups effectiveness is easily achieved due to the diversity of ideas from the members, collectiveness in solving the problems and also moral boost from each member for greater productivity and meeting set targets. Finally collective efforts of a group proves to be more effective since one will do his /her part in anticipation of other will do their part which leads to achieving the mutual objective of the business (Ambrus, 2009, p. 8-12). Group cohesiveness is the state of a group being able to stick together based on goals that organization intends to achieve. Cohesiveness of groups is brought about by either rules or sometimes the intensity of the matter or goal concerning that group.
Cohesiveness is key tool in ensuring that groups achieve designated targets. Group cohesiveness enables groups to run smoothly, improve productivity, ensure full participation of all the members, and makes member accountable for anything that they does. It also improves morality of performance of each member. In my group cohesiveness can be improved though several ways, which includes first though explaining to the members importance of their group that is why they are needed at the group, their groups objectives, and their roles at the group. Secondly, the group should have roles that govern it so that any member who goes against the group is either punished in a particular manner or thrown out of the group depending on the intensity of the matter. Thirdly, the group set clearly the goals and the role of each member at achieving that goal for instance in cleaning environment should specify which members should sensitize the dwellers in the areas they wish to clean (Seashore, 2003, p. 91).
Social influence has always been a factor in decision making in both business world and other social organizations. Firstly, decisions can be made through consensus building between the members. Therefore any decision made through consensus is a mutual decision in which all some members either did not agree with their full decision or part of it. In consensus each of the opposing teams will sacrifice part of their demands in order to get another favor from the other. Secondly, social interaction can also influence decision making via voting from which part of the members are objecting while others are supporting therefore any winning team with majority is assumed to be the decision of all the members.
Members can be encouraged to accept proposals at their working places through giving workers better deals that is giving out proposals that have a touch at the lives or that have a benefit to them. Therefore each proposal should at least have a benefit to them. Secondly, team leader should include members in availing those proposals so that they can be part of those proposals and also ensure that their interests are catered for.
In discouraging the acceptance of proposals at work place one can either present proposals that have adverse effect to the members for instance in a company a proposal to decrease a pay of the workers will automatically be rejected by them since their welfare is worsened off. Secondly, if decisions made concerning the groups, members are not involved then there is likelihood that members will not accept those proposals because of feeling that they are down looked upon by leadership. For the smooth run of a group a leader is highly required to manage that group.
Leaders act as overseers. That is, they ensure that every activity of the organization is carried out well as prescribed by the group for instance leaders are the one to prepare the calendar of activities at a given time. Leaders organize their members by assigning then duties and roles that they will perform. Leaders also coordinate the activities of each member for a mutual aim of achieving organizations goal.
Generally leaders are the main decision makers in the in any group since not all the decisions can be made by all the members. Yes, leaders can emerge from groups through experience that is long serving members who have acquired a lot of knowledge concerning that group can be chosen as a leader. That is why most leaders in business world are chosen from those with experience. Also leaders can emerge from groups especially those with special talents, interests, and dedication. Talented people have proved to deliver in their groups due to the personal “sacrifice” to the roles they have acquired. Perception of group members to the leadership is of great importance because it is through leadership that members will either accept or reject that leadership. For instance if perception of members to the leadership is positive then members will cooperate with that leadership in its duties and these will ensure that the group achieves its objects but if the perception of members to the leaders is negative then this will disrupt all the communication between the leaders and other members (Higby, 2002, p. 1).
Therefore negative perception will deteriorate all the activities of that group. Teams comprises of small groups of individuals with a common goal or objective while working groups is a temporary set of entire no individuals with a mutual goal. Teams are more effective in some situations compared to work groups because teams tend to have a longer time than work groups in carrying out their responsibilities. Besides team shave leaders who gives guidelines on the activities to be carried out by the team members while work groups only arises when there is an activity to carry out therefore there are either temporary or no leaders. There are several situations that teams do better work groups, first work group works are temporal therefore they will only perform a specified task and seize to exist.
If time for instance has elapsed there is likely of poor performance of their activities while teams are not temporal therefore they are likely to perform their activities effectively since there is no time limit. Work groups have temporal or no leaders hence any activities to be carried by the leaders are likely to cause problems on the side of work groups (Lesmeister, 2004, p. 1). For instance in organizations that are fighting for workers rights cannot be temporal because it is a continuous process. Finally it clear that individual group dynamics are important in ensuring smooth running of businesses.
Through leadership of groups which are accepted by the members, there is likelihood of a good performance of those groups. Collectively, individuals will bring in new ideas, experience, and morality in productivity and performance therefore it is advisable to adopt group dynamics than adopting individual approach. In addition groups should have clearly defined goals to minimize the conflicts of interest between the members. Though groups have importance in the business world sometimes they are not effective therefore it is advisable to use them where they are reliable. Here we have talked about group dynamics and group cohesiveness. Also we have seen how group interaction affects the decision making.
Ambrus, A. (2009). Group vs Individual decision-making. Retrieved August 8, 2010, from, http://www.sss.ias.edu/files/papers/econpaper91.pdf Higby, M.
(2002). Teaching more than you know. Retrieved August 8, 2010, from,http://www.rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/6jan2118j2.htm Lesmeister, M. (2004). Leadership for effective groups.
Retrieved August 8, 2010, from,http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/yf/leaddev/he497w.htm Levi, D. (2001). Group Dynamics for Teams. California.
Barnes & Noble. McNamara, C. (2010). Group Dynamics: Basic Nature of Groups and How they develop. Retrieved August 8, 2010, from, http://managementhelp.org/grp_skll/theory/theory.htm Seashore, S.
(2003). Group Cohesiveness in the industrial workgroup. New York. McMillan Publishers.