Group dynamics is arguably one among the toughest topics because according to psychologists, groups cannot be studied through a unilateral approach. Human beings are quite different in terms of reasoning and opinion. This way, they tend to perceive things differently. This is the explanation behind the fact that mob psychology and group decision making are tougher and time consuming as compared to individual psychology and decision making. In a group – be it at the work place or in the school setting – making decisions is difficult for the simple reason that establishing a consensus in group is a difficult idea (Levi, 2011). There will always be an opponent or two to every idea and contribution made. This is the nature of group dynamics – the manner in which people interact and communicate within groups and teams – both formal and informal.
Communication and Interaction Patterns
Communication and interaction patterns are the kinds of channels and nature of frameworks through which messages are passed and feedback is received within a group. In this light, the nature or type of interaction pattern depends on the levels of communication. For instance, the patterns used for intra-group communications varies from those used in intergroup communication, group communication as well as mass communication. The first pattern of communication is the circle. In a circle pattern, the group leader, who is the de facto sender of the message or the information, is in direct contact with the people around him (Forsyth, 2010). He passes information to and receives feedback from the persons next to him. The main disadvantage of this pattern is the actuality that the team leader does not get to get feedback from all members similarly, the last recipient is likely to receive distorted information.
The second pattern of communication is the chain. Much like the circle, the people in a chain do not receive information directly from the group leader. On the contrary, they receive information in a line, such that the last person in the chain remains at risk of receiving unoriginal information. This pattern is considered weaker than the circle because the circle shortens the distance between the leader and the last recipient. The Y pattern of interaction is arguably the most complicated. The leader remains at the center, and has three chains of members attached to him (Forsyth, 2010). The weaknesses of this pattern are a combination of the circle and the chain. The last, and obviously the best compared to the three is the wheel. In a wheel pattern, the leader remains at the center, and communicates directly to every member of the group.
Factors Behind Group Cohesion
Cohesion is the essence of group dynamics. Cohesion within a group is a multidimensional concept as it describes the “we-ness” of the group. Among the most important causes of cohesion is the pursuit of common goals. A common goal is the single most important cause of cohesion because in the absence of such goals, members would have nothing to lose by staying away from the group (Levi, 2011). The second cause of cohesion is group pride and affiliation. Belonging to a group makes one proud especially is such a group is associated with success. Task commitment is another key reason, but psychologists argue that task commitment is directly related with the personality of an individual. Among other noteworthy causes of cohesion are: motivation, the desire to be active, a shared sense of group identity, the strength of teamwork and competitions.
Social Norms and Limitations in a Group
Groups are usually based on either social or formal ties. Such ties are monitored by certain norms or limitations. Basically, the biggest norm is conformity, which typically refers to adherence to the requirements and expectations of the group (Forsyth, 2010). While this is the case, all members are bound by certain specific controls. The second factor underlying group dynamics is consensus. This refers to a point of agreement or in the decision making situations. Consensus is difficult to arrive at. Even so, the process of seeking consensus is likely to bring people together through pooling of ideas. Other causes of team cohesiveness include the quest to attain a constructive social identity, the presence of rules and regulations as well as the institution of strong codes of ethics.
Group Culture
Group culture refers to a team’s way of doing things – which is usually the reason why the group exists. Group culture refers to the collectivity of norms and guidelines that are observed in making decisions and choosing the direction for the long term achievement of the common goals. Group culture is defined by the ethical standards, the rules, the form of leadership, the decision making approach and the relationships among the group members (Levi, 2011). Psychologists and other social scientists explain that the presence of a minority consensus does not imply absence of a culture. On the contrary, it signifies the presence of subcultures within the group’s social spectrum. While this is the case, such minorities are dynamic because not all decisions will always be opposed by the same individuals. All in all, group culture is the factor that cements relationships among members.
References
Forsyth, D. R. (2010). Group dynamics. Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Levi, D. (2011). Group dynamics for teams. Los Angeles: SAGE.
