1. Overview of Group Dynamics Leaders do not work in isolation. In fact, many leaders work in teams and groups, and the dynamics of working in these groups can impact the decision-making process. Some leaders, when dealing with complex organizational problems, will form a group or a team to study the problem and make a decision (Butterfield, 2013). Groups are formed primarily to share information and to make decisions, thus helping each group member to enhance his or her individual ability to contribute to the organization. Conversely, a work team is a group that is formed to provide synergistic benefit to the organization. While work groups have a goal of sharing information, work teams have a goal of benefiting from collective performance. Additionally, groups have neutral to negative synergy with individual contribution accountability, while teams have positive synergy with individual and mutual accountability. Therefore, groups may have random and varied skills, while teams have complementary skills. This week, we will examine effective leadership and decision-making in light of the group environment. Researchers have put forth an extensive effort in order to ascertain how to establish effective leadership practice within a group setting. Moreover, studies have also examined the results of failed leadership and provide recommendations on how to avoid it. For instance, Aboyassin and Abboud (2013) conducted a study, seeking to explore how ineffective leadership behavior affects individual and organizational performance within the context of Jordanian institutions. This study was limited to the manager's point of view and suggests that there are similarities with managers in Arab institutions. However, the researchers caution about generalizing the results of the study to other Arabian countries. Nevertheless, there were quite a number of practical implications and useful information that may help curb or even eliminate ineffective leadership practices which may exist not only in Jordanian institutions, but also in surrounding territories. It should be noted that there have been an extensive amount of studies in American and European regions regarding ineffective leadership and failed practices. However, effective leadership concepts have been highly established for quite a number of years and in a wide array of organizational settings. Effective leadership practices purport more of a collaborative team or group environment, which helped to undergird the organizational leader, the organization's mission, and the necessary steps required for effective decision-making. Perhaps you have been an eyewitness to effective leadership within a group setting. Also, you may have had the opportunity to experience challenges that can exist in a group. As such, organizational leaders in both Middle East and Western cultures can agree that the various challenges that can exist within the group setting can be overcome through effective leadership practices. Leaders do not work in isolation. In fact, many leaders work in teams and groups, and the dynamics of working in these groups can impact the decision-making process. Some leaders, when dealing with complex organizational problems, will form a group or a team to study the problem and make a decision (Butterfield, 2013). Groups are formed primarily to share information and to make decisions, thus helping each group member to enhance his or her individual ability to contribute to the organization. Conversely, a work team is a group that is formed to provide synergistic benefit to the organization. While work groups have a goal of sharing information, work teams have a goal of benefiting from collective performance. Additionally, groups have neutral to negative synergy with individual contribution accountability, while teams have positive synergy with individual and mutual accountability. Therefore, groups may have random and varied skills, while teams have complementary skills. Whether a group comes together on its own or is brought together through the direction of organizational leaders, there is a process that all groups go through that is fairly standard. Each group progresses through five distinct stages. These stages are described by Greenberg (2011) as forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning. Read more about each stage: Forming Storming Norming Performing Adjourning From a leadership and management perspective, group factors can impact performance and worker satisfaction and must be considered in decisions made regarding team member selection and objectives. Individual performance has been attributed to role perception, norms, status differences, size of the group, and cohesiveness. The closer the match between the managerial perception of a worker's role and the worker's understanding of the role, the higher the degree of performance evaluation and the higher the level of job satisfaction by the worker. Group norms, like organizational culture, can influence favorable or undesirable behavior, while status inequities among group members can cause frustration and can impact productivity. Furthermore, reduced job satisfaction can result from having employees that are higher up the organizational ladder work with lower-level employees. Additionally, variations in group size can affect productivity based on the type of responsibilities required by an organization. Specifically, research has found decreased satisfaction with increasing group size, while the more cohesive a group, the higher the level of functioning it exhibits. Individuals in most organizations become part of informal and formal groups from which they respond to organizational objectives. The formation of organizational groups can have a positive impact on individuals and on the organization as they can provide a sense of security, status and self-esteem; affiliation for social needs; power through numbers; and goal achievement of responsibilities that require more than one person for optimal output. For example, a formal group created to address chronic customer service issues may include representatives from all departments in order to obtain all-inclusive customer service information, and therefore be quite large. A too-large group might cause the formation of informal subgroups with different methods of addressing the issue, thus reducing group cohesiveness and creating dissatisfied workers. However, group leadership that manages clear and appropriate individual roles and keeps social loafing to a minimum can leverage the datagathering benefits of larger groups without jeopardizing the outcomes. Furthermore, the roles played by each member of the group may either be satisfying or dissatisfying, depending on the alignment between management and individual perceptions of the roles. For example, having senior managers work with lower-level customer service representatives may be dissatisfying to the senior managers but motivating to the lower-level customer service representatives. If the group norms include meeting agreed-upon deadlines and a high level of commitment to achieving group objectives, it is likely that that group will be high-performing. Group decision-making can be a strong contributor to organizational success. The experience, knowledge, and perspective that individuals bring to groups can often promote optimal decisions. Nonetheless, group decision-making can suffer from time delays, internal conflicts, and pressures of conformity. Leaders and managers can alleviate negative outcomes of the group decision-making process by using techniques that work to overcome group conformity pressures and that limit interpersonal communication during the process by requiring that certain work and individual contributions be created in advance of the actual decision-making session. Check Your Understanding 2. Divergent and Convergent Thinking Groups use both divergent and convergent thinking as they explore problems and make decisions. Divergent thinking was described by Butterfield (2013) as \"thought processes or methods used to generate ideas\" (p. 78). This thinking is typically spontaneous in nature. Convergent thinking was differentiated by Butterfield by its \"organized, understandable and structured format\" (p. 80). A group using divergent thinking processes may use a variety of techniques to generate ideas and solutions, and to make decisions. One of the most well-known techniques is that of brainstorming. A group uses brainstorming when members list as many ideas as possible. Everyone typically contributes to this process and every idea is documented and included. Another divergent thinking technique is group mind mapping. Mind mapping was introduced as a decision-making tool in an earlier module. Groups can use this technique to record each of their ideas. The group could also use the process of free writing and journal writing to capture thoughts and ideas that members have. These techniques each require groups to gather as many ideas as possible from the members. The group is typically ready to move on to convergent thinking if it has a set of ideas to consider. Butterfield suggested that one of the first tasks for the group was to \"cull\" the ideas developed during the divergent thinking process. He suggested that this be done by using the three-pile method of placing each idea into a Yes, No, or Maybe category. The group must then explore the pros and cons of each of the ideas generated. In addition, the group may conduct a cost-benefit analysis and an impact analysis, as it analyzes each of the ideas to move toward a decision (Butterfield, 2013). http://strategiccoffee.chriscfox.com/2012/05/alternating-between-divergent-and.html 3. Groupthink and Consensus Decision-Making One of the most common problems of group decision-making is that of groupthink. Groupthink occurs when group members may not express their opinions because they differ from the majority of the group. It is thought to occur when the group member's desire for harmony outweighs concerns about a good decision (Daft, 2012). If a leader understands groupthink behavior, it can be prevented. Daniel Goleman and Bill George: The Dangers of Groupthink https://youtu.be/ubHEssty_HM D. Goleman and B. George discuss why leaders need diverse opinions and outlooks on their team. One of the first symptoms of groupthink behavior is that of a cohesive group. The group may display a great deal of harmony and very little conflict. The leadership of groups that experience groupthink has a tendency to lack the ability to be impartial, and the group may be experiencing high stress and low self-esteem. Groups engaging in groupthink behavior display some common characteristics. They often overestimate their abilities and skills as a group, are close-minded, and pressure one another to conform to the group. Decision-making leaders must be ready to identify and address groupthink behavior. http://choo.fis.utoronto.ca/FIS/courses/lis2149/Groupthink.html One effective way of making decisions at the group level is that of consensus decision-making. The process of consensus decision-making involves exploring each solution that the group has generated and finding a common ground. The leader must ensure that each member of the group has an opportunity to express his or her reactions to the solution, as well as any objections he or she may have. All group members can express their support or lack of support for the solution. The leader is responsible for building consensus with the group on the solution. Often, part of this process involves discussing with the group what needs to happen before members are able to reach consensus. This process may be lengthy in nature, so it may not be the most effective process to use if a quick decision needs to be made. Conclusion Whether you are leading a group locally in Saudi Arabia, a region in the Middle East, or within the context of a global organization, research has established that effective leadership within the group environment is vital to success and efficiency. The various challenges that leaders face within the context of the group can be overcome if appropriate strategies are put in place. As such, groups can be highly effective within the context of the organization and have proven to assist the organization in reaching its goals, objectives, and overall mission. References Aboyassin, N., & Abood, N. (2013). The effect of ineffective leadership on individual and organizational performance in Jordanian institutions. Competitiveness Review, 23(1), 68-84. Butterfield, J. (2013) Problem solving and decision making (2nd ed.). Independence, KY: Cengage Publishers. Daft, R. L. (2012). Management (10th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Higher Education. Greenberg, J. (2011) Behavior in organizations (10th ed.). New York, NY: Prentice Hall Publishers