Small Group Activities Practical Implementation Issues
Small Group Activities: Practical Implementation Issues
1. Introduction
Modern organisational strength lies deeply hidden in human resource management, with research indicating the irreplaceable position of human resources in modern corporate practice. In light of the management roles and functions in the conversion of human resources into the most important assets, small group culture takes the centre stage. Teamwork and group dynamics took over corporate culture from division of work and scientific management that had little focus on human scope of the organisation. The usage of the words team and small group has not been distinguished in this presentation, but the corporate world prefers team as opposed to small group, which has a multidisciplinary application. However, both terms refer to a smaller organisation of people within the larger organisation, with an aim of carrying out specific tasks (Hollingshead et al. 2004, p6). Development of the team and small groups in the modern organisation is function that continues to challenge the human resource management. In view of small group management issues, several areas of organisational operations face difficulties as demonstrated in this study.
This proposal details on the research study set to shed light on the various activity implementation difficulties for small organisational groups. From the provided information, research will be conducted to establish the level of impracticality for various issues isolated in the study. Details on the modality of conducting the main research accompany the design proposed in this proposal, with a highlight on various analytical and presentation approaches also included.
Background
Knowledge organisation exploits the findings of the information and communication technology insights on the human resources (Lewis 2004, p1520). One major application of such findings is the importance of teamwork and the management of teams to reap maximum benefits from the team. Group dynamics backed by management needs for every concept on the small group form part of the knowledge management approach. Such an approach eliminates loopholes in the delivery of results in the organisation since certain challenges inherently affecting human organisations come into focus at the small group.
The accuracy applied in identification of the challenges and effectively acting to resolve their threats determines the success of the group in organisational operations (Ilgen and Kozlowski 2006, p78). Despite the success ratings that the modern human resource management attaches to small groups in organisational operations, there are inherent implementation challenges that can be isolated. Some of the implementation challenges are associated with the design of the groups whereas others are dependent on the composition of the group. Usually, diversity issues constitute the bulk of the management challenge experienced by the human resource department.
However, the nature of the organisation, the tasks engaged in as well as the attributes of the management team also defines the performance trajectories exposed to the small groups. The organisation is expected to suffer from underperforming groups, to which the core of organisational mandate of performing is allocated (Brown, Freiberg and Lord 1999, p170). Inefficiency in small group management and delivery of results can affect virtually every aspect of operations depending on the level of impairment and the sensitivity of the impairment to the overall organisational operations. As discussed in the literature review, different perspectives must be taken in such group studies.
Specific Objectives
i) To identify the main implementation issues faced by small groups in the delivery of their tasks
ii) To establish the magnitude of isolated issues in hampering efficiency of small groups
iii) To determine aspects of potential organisational impairment cropping from small group inefficiency
Research Question
Which implementation issues face corporate small group and their potential damage to organisational operations?
2. Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
Small groups and teams experience a number of pressures internally and externally, but the commonest forces are internally generated. In this section, literature is provided to guide in the formulation of the main research paper, with a keen focus on team psychological challenges, stage development and succession factors and personality diversity issues.
2.1.1 Psychological Needs of Groups and Teams
The life of the small group is determined by the success that its activities achieve and the sustainability of the operations undertaken within a stipulated time. Research on group dynamics illustrates complex attributes of groups concerning their sociopsychological balance where individuals’ relationship contribution to the group affects the face of the interactions (Klimoski, Mohammed and Rentsch 2000, p124). Success in a group in terms of bonding, homogeneity and coordination variables is heavily linked to psychological determinants of the group. Psychodynamic analysis of the group implies that historical background of the group, as determined by daily encounters between members dictates the dependence attributes that members can confer to the group. As a result of the outcomes of established dependence, other interdependence interplays emerge making the group a network of psychological reliance on various work and non-work related engagements. Continued evolution and development of the group presents the relations to certain independence boundaries against the backdrop of a refined meshwork of counterdependence that determine the functional features in the psychology unit that the group becomes.
According to Rosenthal and Tickle-Degnen (1987, p116), communication attributes of the group formed determine the cohesion within the group and perhaps within the organisation. The importance of successful communication within all levels of organisation must take care of horizontal and vertical needs (Barsadem and Kelly 2001, p111). Accommodating every opinion of the members may be the most important approach in ensuring sufficient resolution of communication issues, but it is not always possible. Decision making sometimes flouts individual contributions and makes it difficult for every group member to feel appreciated in the manner that creates the ideal communication setting. Small groups’ numbers are better in collection of ideas and airing of grievances than other inclusive platforms, but reaching at a consensus is not always guaranteed. In light of the general requirement that regular and intensive meetings are held to build and strengthen groups, positive outcomes are not guaranteed.
2.1.2 Group Cycle and Stage Succession Factors
Groups and teams’ formation happens in a cyclic manner with distinct virtual stages that have different features and functions. For a group to succeed and establish a firm foundation to meet its objectives, success in one stage must usher in the conditions needed for the next stage to be operational. Inherent practical challenges for the stage succession concept determine the complexity of team development and strength. Generally, five stages for group formation, establishment, evolution and maturation can virtually be isolated in all groups as discussed below (Tuckman 1965, p386).
The initial stage for the development of the group or team is formation, which is precipitated by the need to realise particular objectives through a group of persons sharing a similar interest. Within the organisation, outlined productivity and operations targets define the common interests that guide the group, whereas other groups outside the corporate confinements may be formed due to different specifications (Abudi 2010, para.3). Certain formation complexities affect the success of this stage, which is perhaps the most important since successive progressions are dependent on a successive formation stage. Formation complexities include the identification of objectives and clear definition of scope. Usually, scope issues undermine the realisation of formation stage objectives.
The second stage of group development is referred to as storming, entails arriving at a conceptual agreement where members define the route to be taken in solving the challenge ahead. Resources are gathered in order to facilitate the formulation of appropriate working formulae. Successful storming paves in norming that characterises incorporation of working formulae into practical group culture (Lepsinger 2012, para.2). Referred to as norming, this stage comprises of activities targeted at formalising strategy, setting up rules and regulations as well as definition of interactions and relations. Additionally, a fourth distinct level referred to as the performing stage, which entails kicking off the operations by the group, occurs after the accumulation of the needed resources alongside defined working formulae. Performing requires an enabling environment for the identified processes to kick off and continue on a sustainable trajectory, with potential abortion of operations risked by impairments to this and subsequent stage.
The final group development stage is referred to as the adjourning stage that involves the completion of the mandate of the group, which is subject to the successful completion of the other stages. A group winds up its mandate when the task for which it was formed is achieved or the timeline for its mandate comes to maturation (Warner 1982). Most corporate small groups and teams have their life and mandate renewed over several times since the delivery of the objectives is a cyclic routine. Group operations practicality under the above development stages is under intense pressure from various progression variables that each stage presents to operations. Appropriate group management dictates that every small group must identify each of the stages within the context of the objectives. It is not always possible to isolate the stages since they are virtual concepts, and the accuracy of their identification determines how group management interventions are designed.
2.1.3 Personality Diversity Factors
As illustrated above, the group brings together diverse personalities for purposes of working together with an aim of achieving common goals. The timelines for the development of the group and apparent transition from one stage to the other may not be sufficient to completely incorporate personalities into the group. Totterdell (2000, p850), reckons that the complexity of dealing with conflicting personalities in the group translates into a major challenge for the smooth running of the group. Whereas personality diversity may prove to be strength in group activities, it may hinder success if the individual group members do not get enough time to gel together into a winning team.
Staffing challenges particularly confront group management in terms of balancing the needs of the group, if abilities and interpersonal skills are not well understood for every member (Passenheim 2009, p73). It may take a couple of trials to determine, if the group is well balanced, which translates into exposure to risks of impractical groups. Since the management functions as outlined in conferring the mandate and tasks among group members assume knowledge of input and abilities, it may not always possible to determine how practical a member can be in new group assignments. Small group activities in terms of putting together the most competent group may therefore be termed as a sensitive gamble to make.
3. Methodology
Research Paradigm
Interpretivism as the research paradigm of choice will be employed as dictated by nature of qualitative analysis involved in the study. Interpretivism entails a thorough technique in the collection of data usually by engaging every survey question as a separate aspect of the survey with a special attention. It is from the individualised focus that qualitative cues can be drawn and conclusions extended in the interpretations (Denzin and Lincoln 2003). The researcher’s attention is highly important in the delivery of judgments and drawing of conclusions. It therefore implies that the interpretation of the data findings with regard to the expected results requires a keen mind for appropriate decision making.
Research Plan
The core of the research will be targeting various concepts identified in the findings of related research, which form the guiding principles for the research design. As illustrated in the various outline and design attributes of the research, special focus will be dedicated to reveal the importance of the psychological aspects of the group, stage development and succession issues and personality diversity issues. In this regard, data targeted for collection is direct team or group members’ opinions for comparison with the available literature on the same topic. A team intensive working environment will be highlighted for the collection of the data sources, with the survey model being applied as the best data collection tool.
Data Collection
An interview will be designed to facilitate the collection of data from the respondents. Both open and closed end questions will be incorporated in the questionnaire to facilitate the collection of as much information as possible. In view of the identified data source, the service industry such as in the marketing sector, which is labour intensive, will be selected. Randomised samples will be employed in the survey, with the most suitable administration of the questionnaire being dependent on the respondent’s preference. Quick response sessions as well as leaving the questionnaire with the respondents for a few hours will be considered on convenience perspectives (see Appendix C). In view of the sample size selected, survey administration and data analysis needs, the questionnaire will be simplified but with intensive probing capacity for the intended information, with structured and unstructured formats being used.
Sample Size
Sampling technique of choice will be selected to coincide with the data analysis method selected, to accommodate the entire sample size selected. Alternatively, the sampling technique will consider the collection of all relevant information needed in the survey’s objectives. A sample of fifty respondents will be involved in the deliberations, although optimisation skills may be applied in the research for possible slight increments or reductions. Each of the respondents will be subjected to the survey questionnaire within the shortest time possible to allow for analysis time (see timelines in Appendix A). This implies that the sample size has practicality issues highlighted in its determination.
Data Analysis
The data obtained in the survey will undergo qualitative analysis to determine the implication that the responses made have on the expected results. According to the technique proposed by Elo and Kyngas (2008, p1), the data obtained from the survey will be subjected to analytical comparison with expectations showing how small groups activities encounter operation issues. The three areas of considerations will be compared with the objectives and research questions for the formation of a conclusion. Extrapolated interpretation of the meanings of each answer to the questions contained in the questionnaire will facilitate the formulation of the conclusion.
Risks
Despite the fact that the questionnaire administration will purely be administered to intellectuals in the service industry, allowances will be considered for potential risks that could compromise the outcomes of the study. The complexity of the qualitative nature of the data received implies that the accuracy of the data collected is likely to be affected by slight misrepresentations of facts. To this end, a risk-benefit approach on the underlying considerations will comprise the main intervention perspective with an aim to reduce the involved risks.
The commonest of research problems expected in the research include problems associated with the credibility of the responses obtained from the respondents. Despite the fact that the respondents had clear instructions on the appropriate approach to give answers for the survey, there is a chance that the responses are subjected to a certain level of quantified bias. To reduce the risk of bias, simple and straightforward questions with clear instructions are designed. Budgetary limitation will fall within the illustrated outline in the estimates (see Appendix B).
Ethical Issues
The administration of the survey poses a challenge to the integrity of the results in that the respondents will be a mixture of various hierarchical levels in the selected institution. In giving information about the operations of the organisation, junior employees are likely to experience some form of fear associated with their inferior hierarchical roles. As a result of the apparent risk in delivery of appropriate information on internal operations of the organisation, special measures will be incorporated in the preparatory stages of carrying out the survey. Permission will be sought from the management and explanations given to the effect that the data collected will not be used for any other purpose other than for academic study. Junior employees will be incorporated into the randomised survey with a prior explanation that they could remain anonymous and that the findings will not be revealed to any other party other than to protected academic audience.
References
Abudi, G. (2010) The five stages of team development: a case study, [Online] Available from: <http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/the-five-stages-of-team-development-a-case-study.html> [Accessed 31 March 2012]
Barsadem S. G., & Kelly, J. R. (2001) Mood and emotions in small groups and work teams, Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 99-130.
Brown, D. J., Freiberg, S. J., & Lord, R. G. (1999) Understanding the dynamics of leadership: The role of follower self-concepts in the leader/follower relationship, Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 78, pp:167–203.
Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. (2003) The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Elo S. and Kyngäs H. (2008) The qualitative content analysis process, Journal of Advanced Nursing. vol.62, no.1, pp: 107–115.
Hargittai, E. (2009) Research confidential: solutions to Problems Most Social Scientists Pretend They Never Have. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Hollingshead, A., McGrath, J., Moreland, R., Rohrbaugh, J. (2004) Interdisciplinary perspective on small groups, Small Groups Research, vol. 35, no. 3, pp:2-16
Ilgen, D., & Kozlowski, W. J. (2006) Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, vol. 7, no. 3, pp: 77-124
Klimoski, R. J., Mohammed, S., & Rentsch, J. R. (2000) The measurement of team mental models: We have no shared schema, Organisational Research Methods, vol. 3, pp:123–165.
Lepsinger, R. (2011) Leading from a distance: five best practices for virtual team leaders, [Online] Available from: <http://www.evancarmichael.com/Leadership/5219/Leading-From-a-Distance-Five-Best-Practices-for-Virtual-Team-Leaders.html> [Accessed 31 March 2012]
Lewis, K. (2004) Knowledge and performance in knowledge-worker teams: A longitudinal study of transactive memory systems, Management Science, vol. 50, no.1, pp:1519–1533.
Lin, A. (1998) Bridging positivist and interpretivist approaches to qualitative methods, Policy Studies Journal, vol. 26, pp.162-180.
Matveev, A. (2009) The advantages of employing quantitative and qualitative methods in intercultural research, IV RCA Conference, New York, [Online]. Available at: HYPERLINK “http://www.russcomm.ru/eng/rca_biblio/m/matveev01_eng.shtml” http://www.russcomm.ru/eng/rca_biblio/m/matveev01_eng.shtml [Accessed 31 March 2011]
Passenheim, O. (2009). Project Management, Denmark: Ventus Publishing ApS
Rosenthal, R., & Tickle-Degnen, L., (1987) Group rapport and nonverbal behaviour, Review of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 9, pp.113–136.
Totterdell, P. (2000) Catching moods and hitting runs: Mood linkage and subjective performance in professional sport teams, Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 85, no. 6, pp.848–859.
Tuckman, B. W. (1965) Developmental sequence in small groups, Psychological Bulletin, vol. 63, pp.384–399.
Warner, R. M. (1982) The Psychologist As Social Systems Consultant. In T. Millon, C. Green, & R. Meagher (Eds.), Handbook of Clinical Health Psychology, New York: Plenum.
Appendix A
Time Scale (lit review, data collection, data analysis)
Time Frame
Activity Jan-Feb 2012 Feb-April 2012 Jan-Feb 2013 Feb-April 2013 May-June 2013 July-Aug 2013
Title development Research proposal write up. Pre-testing/Data collection Data analysis, and interpretation Report writing Submission of Reports Appendix B
Resources needed
Description Item Cost (£) Total cost(£)
Proposal development stationary Pens
Foolscap
Flash disc (1GB) 20
Proposal development requirement Internet browsing
Typing
Printing and Binding 40
Pre-testing Printing
Photocopying 20
Data collection, questionnaire Printing
Photocopying
Travelling
Communication
Interviews
100
Total Cost 180
Appendix C
Questionnaire
Section A (team psychological challenges)
1. Are feelings and perceptions important in delivery of group work? Yes [ ] No [ ]
2. When is the rating of your group productivity under the following headings?
i) Happy 20% [ ] 40% [ ] 60% [ ] 80% [ ] 100 [ ] Not Sure [ ]
ii) Angered 20% [ ] 40% [ ] 60% [ ] 80% [ ] 100 [ ] Not Sure [ ]
iii) After winning an award 20% [ ] 40% [ ] 60% [ ] 80% [ ] 100 [ ] Not Sure [ ]
iv) After being ranked poorly 20% [ ] 40% [ ] 60% [ ] 80% [ ] 100 [ ] Not Sure [ ]
3. Are there notable sources of individual group members’ lowly moods? Yes [ ] No [ ] Specify one if any…………….
4. Are there notable sources of individual group members’ happy moods? Yes [ ] No [ ] Specify one if any…………….
Section B (stage development)
5. Do you recall the date of formation of your group? Yes [ ] No [ ]
6. What three aspects of group development and growth are important?
i)…………………………………………………
ii)………………………………………………….
iii)………………………………………………..
Section C (personality diversity issues)
7. Are member special traits and talents important in the group productivity of your? Yes [ ] No [ ] Specify three if any……………
8. Do different traits affect productivity of the group? Yes [ ] No [ ] Specify two if any…………….
9. Can differences be solved in groups? Yes [ ] No [ ] Specify how in two ways…………….
10. Are there better team players than others? Yes [ ] No [ ] If any, give a description of one good player…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
and description of bad player………………………………………………………………………………..
