FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
C H A P T E R
3
Interpersonal Dynamics
F
and Conflict
I
N
D
Working with other people can be Lone of the most rewarding aspects of being on a
team, but it can be one of the most challenging
as well. This chapter begins with a discusE
sion about social norms and how they develop. Then we explore how individual social
Y
styles differ and contribute to the interpersonal
dynamics of a team. Often, differences in
the way people interact can create misunderstandings
and frustration. Fortunately, there
,
are a number of common interpersonal problems that, once understood, can be minimized. But even in the best of circumstances, conflict tends to affect both team members
S always bad. As a matter of fact, the right kind of
and the team atmosphere. Conflict is not
conflict is characteristic of high-performing teams and can lead to strong cohesion and
A
team success.
R
A
CASE 3.1: SURVIVOR
5 clothes are in tatters. They scowl and are so exhausted
The participants are dirty, malnourished, and tired. Their
that they don’t even bother to wave the flies from their3faces. They have resorted to tribalism and clandestine alliances to make it to the next day, seeking strength in numbers against the faceless, ethereal, insidious specter that
threatens to snuff out their flame of life. They lie, they1cheat, they steal, they fight . . . yet hardly anyone tries to
escape. This is not some deranged parallel universe, or9sci-fi show, or post-apocalyptic vision of the world. This is
Survivor, the reality television series in which people compete
B for prizes, money, and the title of “sole survivor.”
Anyone who has watched the series knows the structure. Sixteen strangers are dropped off on a remote island
U With the limited resources of a machete, cooking pot,
and divided into two teams or “tribes” to fight for survival.
and canteens, they have to quickly build a shelter and find food and water. At regular intervals, the two tribes
compete with one another for prizes and supplies. After each competition, the losing team convenes at a “tribal
council” to choose a team member to eliminate from the game.
Under such duress, strained and contentious interpersonal dynamics quickly develop within the two teams.
During every episode, contestants lie to one another to gain an advantage and instill loyalty from others. There
are threats that strain the group, outbursts that alienate allies, and displays of dominance that intimidate, inspire,
43
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
44
Working in Teams
and divide tribal sentiment. One fascinating aspect of the show is when a person is “voted off,” the host snuffs
out the player’s flame/torch and dramatically states, “The tribe has spoken. It’s time for you to go.” Whether they
are seen as a weak link or a threat to win the $1 million prize, the person is singled out from the group, judged,
and sent away.
One of the interesting paradoxes that team members have to confront is their degree of loyalty to the team
versus personal survival. For example, it is in the best interest of the team for every member to forage for food and
water; but it is in the best interest of each individual to conserve his or her energy and allow others to do the
majority of the work. Indeed, a difference in work ethic is often one of the first issues of contention that emerges
on the remote islands. Members who are working hard to help the team survive become extremely frustrated with
F
those who aren’t doing their fair share of the work.
Another interpersonal issue that comes up early in theI Survivor season is the question of alliances. Tribal
members quickly realize that they need to form coalitions with other teammates who will watch their backs and
N
protect them. Subgroups strategize and work together to get to the final stages of the game when they will ultiD manipulation, and betrayal create the tumultuous
mately compete against one another. Issues of trust, honesty,
drama that has made this show a success.
L
When participants become hungry, tired, and stressed out, they get grumpy and irritable. Tempers flare. People
E
storm off in disgust. Teammates think the worst about one another and become suspicious of every word or action.
Y
The remote islands of Survivor are a crucible of human interaction.
Everything is intensified. While most group
experiences are not as volatile, the same dynamics that are, dramatically highlighted on the show are present in
some form or fashion.
S
A in Survivor? What do we learn about human
What fundamentals of interpersonal dynamics are evident
nature?
R
What lessons can we learn from Survivor about the balance
A of team alliances and personal survival?
Case Study Discussion Questions
1.
2.
3. Describe the type of people who end up winning Survivor.
5
4. What, if any, parallels exist between Survivor and our experience
of everyday life?
3
1
The producers of the TV show Survivor know exactly how to create a social setting that
9 shows such as The Real World and The
leads to high drama. The structure of reality
Bachelor/Bachelorette create interpersonal dynamics
that are extreme and evocative. Yet
B
viewing statistics prove that these shows are clearly popular and entertaining to many
despite their exaggerated storylines. ViewersUare captivated by the interpersonal dynamics
among contestants who are trying to capitalize on the basic need of human beings both to
fit in and stand out. We all want to fit in and be part of the group. Getting along with others
and forging alliances is the key to survival, if not success, in many of these shows. But contestants also want to be special and have a unique place within the group. They want to be
the sole survivor. They want to stay in the Real World house and parlay their fame into
future success. They want to get a rose and possibly find the love of their lives.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
45
Interpersonal dynamics describes the interaction among members in a specific social
context. It describes the way members relate to one another within a certain setting. Each
setting is different depending on the purpose of the group, the unique constellation of
members, and the physical or virtual setting. In order to assess the socio-emotional environment of a group, observers might ask themselves the following questions:
• Do members seem to enjoy working together?
• What do members do when they enter and exit meetings?
• Is there an atmosphere of lightheartedness and laughter in the meetings?
F
I
• What nonverbal messages do people seem to be communicating?
N
• Do members express frustration directly or indirectly?
D
• Are members assertive, passive, passive-aggressive, or aggressive?
L
E
NORMS
Y
Norms are the interpersonal rules that,members are expected to follow. They are estab• Is everyone participating equally?
lished and at times enforced in order to get members to conform to certain expectations
and standards of behavior (Hogg & Reid, 2006). These rules or expectations create order
and stability by acknowledging what isS
expected of members—though this acknowledgement does not necessarily require any explicit declaration or statement. Instead, through
A
the group members’ interactions and time spent together, norms are often established
through unspoken behavior protocols that
R simply come to be. Norms shape many aspects
of group life, including seating arrangements, communication patterns, language, attire,
A
humor, and respect for the leader; and the list goes on.
Similar to the function of traditions, norms define roles and behavior in such a way that
makes social settings predictable through
5 repetition over time. For example, many of us
expect to be served turkey on Thanksgiving Day. Over the years, through much repetition,
3 has become an accepted ritual in many cultures.
and with the support of family elders, this
Of course, much like traditions, norms can
1 either become outdated or outgrow their original purpose and therefore need to be periodically examined and updated when necessary.
Norms not only describe “what is”9(descriptive norms) but also “what should be”
(injunctive norms). For example, imagine
B a group of students meeting to discuss a class
project. Suppose a member jokingly makes an inappropriate racial comment; because this
U
is a new group, a norm about racial comments
has not yet been established. If everyone
laughs, a descriptive norm that endorses these kinds of comments is established. On the
other hand, if a member says, “That’s not cool. I’m uncomfortable with those kinds of comments,” and others nod their heads or give their assent in some way, then an injunctive
norm is established, and the member who made the comment is now in jeopardy of losing
status and being ostracized by the group. This all takes place in a matter of seconds, but the
ramifications can last a long time.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
46
Working in Teams
Some norms are explicitly communicated by one or more members of the group while
implicit norms operate through more indirect means. Often, implicit norms are not clearly
defined, or made explicit, until a member has been found in violation of one of them.
Adherence to team norms is more likely to occur when (a) members perceive a behavior to
be universally performed by other group members, (b) there is a risk of social sanctions
being imposed in light of not upholding any particular attitude or behavior, or (c) there is
a reward associated with complying with the perceived norm. One of this book’s authors
has established a cell phone policy (i.e., norm) by answering students’ phones that ring
during class. He puts the unsuspecting caller on speaker phone and lets the class listen
while he asks the caller to share an interesting story about the phone’s owner. It only takes
one or two experiences like this for studentsFto remember to turn their cell phones off during class. Even though this norm was explicitly
I stated at the beginning of the semester, it
often takes a mild “social sanction” like this to change behavior.
N
Team norms can develop in one of four ways (Feldman, 1984). First, a team’s initial
meeting often establishes a pattern of normsD
that determines future interpersonal behavior
and expectations. Gersick (1988, 1989) has observed that the structure set in the first meetL
ing of a team’s existence becomes the default pattern for the group, remaining unchalE it is reexamined in order to find more
lenged until the midpoint of the group, when
effective ways to achieve objectives. This being the case, it should be reiterated just how
Y
important it is for group leaders to be deliberate about the kind of norms they directly or
indirectly establish in that first meeting. For ,example, will the group be focused on relationships or only tasks? How will members relate to one another? How will group meetings be
conducted? And so on. The leader models behavior that will translate into default norms
S
for the group.
Second, norms are often established when
A the leader or influential member makes an
explicit statement or deliberate action regarding a particular norm. In the previous examR his cell phone policy at the beginning of the
ple, the class instructor stated the norm about
semester and then called attention to it when
Ait was violated. Not everyone in a classroom
has the credibility to create such norms. For example, if an upset student were to suggest
that midterm exam grades should not count toward the final grade, nobody would take him
or her seriously. Group members must have enough
status and authority either to challenge
5
an existing norm or create a new one.
3
Another way norms are established is through the experience of a critical event. At
times, teams experience significant events that
1 force the examination or establishment of
various norms. For example, a college football team that violates NCAA recruiting regula9
tions might have to voluntarily alter the norms, values, and practices of its coaches in order
B major policy violation and the subsequent
to avoid serious sanctions and penalties. This
probationary period would be a critical event
U that would force the athletic program to
examine old norms and create new ones that honor the spirit and letter of NCAA guidelines.
Again, organizations and institutions are wise to periodically evaluate their policies and
practices before a negative critical event catches them unprepared.
Finally, team norms are inevitably carried over from prior group experiences. Individuals
do not enter new groups as blank slates. Past group experiences are the springboards from
which each new group is entered. Team members apply the norms from past team experiences that are similar in kind to their current team. For example, college students beginning
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
47
a new class at the beginning of the semester will have 12-plus years of prior educational
experiences from which to draw in order to know both what to expect in class and what is
expected of them. These prior experiences will serve as the basis for understanding the
new class environment until new norms are identified.
Source of Group Norms
• Initial group patterns
• Explicit behavior or statements
• Critical events
F
I
Hackman (2002) argues that two specific
N group norms are necessary for maximum
group functioning: ongoing self-evaluation and ethical standards of behavior. Effective
D
groups are, first, proactive and self-critical as they develop project management and problem-solving strategies (Postmes, Spears,L
& Cihangir, 2001). They continually scan the environment to determine the best course of action for any given situation. These groups are
E
also willing to discard outdated or poorly conceived strategies that are no longer effective.
Ygeneral human tendency to respond to problems
This norm is important in combating the
and demands with automatic and habitual
responses (Cannon & Witherspoon, 2005).
,
• Past group experiences
Groups and organizations have a tendency to take a strategy or solution that worked in the
past and apply it to new situations until it becomes an unquestioned operating procedure
that may be less than optimal. This practice,
S clearly, is not productive.
The second norm that Hackman sees as crucial for effective group performance is the
A
commitment to ethical guidelines and operational
responsibility. Groups exist within organizational contexts that have rules about
Rproper behavior. When challenges and pressures
confront a group, the group must act ethically and responsibly according to organizational
guidelines and general ethical principlesAsuch as honesty and integrity. Without this explicitly stated norm, it can be easily compromised when clients, bosses, or influential peers are
demanding results or when there is great incentive for personal gain. Hackman acknowl5
edges that secondary norms involving issues such as punctuality and conflict can help
groups function more efficiently but must
3 be determined by the members of each individual group. The next section presents a model of interpersonal styles that describes how
1
people relate to one another and why there might be potential difficulties.
SOCIAL STYLES
9
B
U
Group members express themselves in a multitude of ways ranging from productive to
destructive. As social creatures living in social contexts, people naturally develop interpersonal strategies that become established patterns of social behavior. The characteristics
of these interpersonal strategies can then be categorized into various “styles” of verbal
and nonverbal interaction. The social style of individuals can be determined by identifying
interpersonal characteristics along two continuums: degree of assertiveness and degree of
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
48
Working in Teams
emotional expression (Baney, 2004; Bolton & Bolton, 1996; Merrill & Reid, 1981). Based
upon these two variables, group members can be classified as one of four social styles: analytic, driver, expressive, or amiable. While theoretical models like this one may risk artificially reducing complex interpersonal behavior into oversimplified categories, awareness of
individual social styles can help reduce the risk of misunderstandings and inaccurate assessments. For example, team leaders who understand the various social styles of their members
can tailor their communication in ways that are most appropriate for each style (Wicks &
Parish, 1990). In addition, awareness of one’s own style may aid in avoiding potential communication problems and can lead to an increase in effective communication.
As seen in Figure 3.1, assertiveness is plotted on the horizontal axis and ranges from
F
“asking” to “telling.” While individuals demonstrate
different levels of assertiveness
depending on their immediate social context,
their
predominant
style tends to prevail in
I
most cases. In general, those with an “asking” orientation are less interested in influencing
N
others than are those with a “telling” orientation. The following descriptions of “asking”
and “telling” behaviors help identify an individual’s
primary orientation:
D
L
• Asking: States opinions more carefully without a call for action from others.
E animated nonverbal gestures.
Speaks in a softer voice while using less
Y
• Telling: States opinions more authoritatively,
including a strong call for action from
others. Speaks in a louder voice while, using more forceful gestures.
Figure 3.1
Social Styles
S
A
R
A
Controlled
5
Analytic
Driver
3 Objective, determined,
Industrious, systematic,
persistent, detail-oriented, 1 efficient, independent,
serious, precise, thinking
pragmatic, decisive, action
oriented, strong need to be 9 oriented, strong need for
right
results
Asking
Amiable
Friendly, dependable,
easygoing, cooperative,
loyal, feeling oriented,
strong need to maintain
relationships
B
U
Expressive
Imaginative, stimulating, funloving, enthusiastic,
spontaneous, strong need
for social recognition
Emotive
Telling
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
49
Next, the expression of emotion is plotted on the vertical axis and ranges from “controlled” to “emotive.” Someone with a controlled posture expresses very little emotion,
whereas an emotive person expresses a significant amount of emotion and energy:
• Controlled: Prefers facts and details to feelings. Limits small talk and typically
speaks with a limited range of vocal inflection and facial expression.
• Emotive: Enjoys stories, jokes, small talk, and the expression of feelings. Speaks
with more animated vocal inflection and facial expression.
Based upon these two variables, individuals can be classified as a driver, expressive,
amiable, or analytic. While people areFcomplex and do not necessarily fit into discrete
categories, this framework is still helpful. It can give us a better understanding of how
I
people relate to one another in general and how they prefer to communicate.
Group members who have identical N
social styles have the easiest time communicating
with one another. Those with adjacent styles
D (quadrants that are touching each other) have
a number of characteristics in common and will also have a relatively easy time working
L For example, an expressive will have an easier
together.
time communicating
with another expressive than with
E
a driver. However, those with diagonally opposite styles
Y
(amiable-driver
and analytic-expressive) tend to have the
most ,difficulty communicating with each other due to
the incongruence in their styles.
Different socials styles have preferred ways of communicating S
with others, and those differences can create interpersonal problems. A developmental goal of this model is to
Ainterpersonal versatility. Leaders who understand
develop
the social
R styles of their members can adapt their own style
in order to communicate in the predominant style of the
A with whom he or she is interacting. For example,
individual
an expressive leader may take on a more task-oriented focus
in order to engage those with an analytic style. Learning
5
about one’s own style and being able to identify the styles of
others3
is one factor contributing to the flexibility necessary
for communicating most effectively with others.
1
In addition to being aware of our own style and accurately 9
assessing the social styles of others, we must adapt
our style to match the style of the person to whom we are
B
trying to relate. As a general rule, the driver and expressive styles need to improve their
U
listening skills and use more probing questions
and paraphrasing to draw out the opinions
of others. Analytic and amiable styles would do well to increase their assertiveness.
Tangibly, this means that they must practice expressing themselves more directly and learn
to communicate their observations, thoughts, feelings, and desires with confidence.
INTERPERSONAL CIRCUMPLEX
As previously stated, differences in social styles can contribute to interpersonal problems
on teams. The interpersonal circumplex model (Birtchnell, 1993) is similar to the social
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
50
Working in Teams
styles model in that it suggests that individuals relate to one another on two important
dimensions: dominance versus submission and distant (cold) versus close (warm). The
dominance versus submission dimension describes the degree of assertiveness an individual exerts in interpersonal communication and posturing, making it similar to the
horizontal “assertiveness” dimension of the social styles model. The distant versus close
axis, similar to the emotionality component of the social styles model, is a measure of
sociability and friendliness.
Dominant
Distant
F
I
N
D
L
E
Y
Submissive
,
Close
According to the interpersonal circumplex model, interpersonal problems emerge when
team members exhibit behavior at the extreme of either dimension. The Inventory of
S & Friis, 2000) identifies potential probInterpersonal Problems (Gude, Moum, Kaldestad,
lems at the extremes of these two continuums
A and suggests a third area of concern: interpersonal sensitivity. Some people tend to be oversensitive to challenges or questions, while
R
others are insensitive and unaware of how they are coming across to others.
A
Problematic Behavior Within Three Interpersonal Domains
5
3
• Sociability dimension: Being overly friendly or cold and aloof
1
• Interpersonal sensitivity: Being oversensitive or insensitive
9
B
The key to interpersonal success is to have the right balance of assertiveness, sociability,
U
and sensitivity within an individual’s social settings.
Unfortunately, those ideals are not con• Assertiveness dimension: Being too domineering or too passive
sistent across social contexts. For example, a business meeting might require more assertiveness than a church potluck dinner, which might require a lot more sociability. Individuals
have to accurately read the different social cultures within which they interact, and adjust
their interpersonal behavior accordingly. In addition, teams have different tolerance levels
for each of the dimensions, which makes interpersonal sensitivity an important skill for
members to use in order to understand the norms and expectations operational in the team.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
51
Leaders and members alike can check their own behaviors and reactions to others
against these dimensions in order better to understand what might be causing interpersonal difficulties. Of course, this requires self-awareness, interpersonal sensitivity, and
tenacious honesty. We tend to place blame on others without considering how we might
be contributing to the problem. Interpersonal tensions are often unavoidable, but the way
members deal with them will determine whether or not they hinder team performance.
Conflicts and personality clashes can make group experiences quite uncomfortable.
Negative emotions can have a ripple effect on groups, a concept researchers call emotional
contagion (Brief & Weiss, 2002). For example, Barsade (2002) tested the impact of emotions
on groups by randomly assigning 94 business school undergraduates to 29 groups. Each
F was asked to participate in a management
group, consisting of three to five members,
simulation where they had to allocate bonuses
for hypothetical employees. Each person in
I
the group was acting as a manager in the simulation and had to advocate for his or her own
N
employee. In addition, they were told that if they could not come to agreement within a
certain amount of time, nobody wouldD
receive a bonus. This type of simulation creates a
stressful group experience that often generates rich dynamics for research purposes. To
L
complicate matters even further, there was a confederate or conspirator in each group
E state. Barsade (2002) instructed confederates to
secretly demonstrating a certain emotional
exhibit one of four emotional states (cheerful enthusiasm, hostile irritability, serene
Y
warmth, or depressed sluggishness) as shown below.
,
Each of the group sessions was videotaped
and viewed by outside reviewers. Observers
and group members alike confirmed the hypothesis that the positive emotions of a group
member positively affected the emotional state of other members. Similarly, the negative
S
emotions of the confederate created negative
feelings in others. Furthermore, positive
contagion affected group performance A
leading to higher levels of cooperativeness, ability
to resolve conflict, and perceptions of task performance.
Rsignificant ways. Interpersonal dynamics can
Members influence one another in
create either a positive or negative socio-emotional
environment that impacts both team
A
Table 3.1
Types of Emotions in Teams5
3
1
Cheerful Enthusiasm
9
Pleasant, happy, warm, and optimistic in
an energetic, active, and alert way;
B
cheerful and enthusiastic.
U
High Pleasantness
High
Energy
Low
Energy
Serene Warmth
Happy and optimistic but in a calm, lowenergy way; emits warmth, serenity, and
a pleasant calmness.
Low Pleasantness
Hostile Irritability
Actively and energetically unpleasant and
pessimistic; behaves with hostility,
frustration, impatience, anxiety, and
irritability.
Depressed Sluggishness
Unpleasant and unhappy in a low-energy
way; behaves in a depressed, sluggish,
dull, and lethargic manner.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
52
Working in Teams
performance and member satisfaction. Even when members have high levels of selfawareness and interpersonal maturity, their varied personalities and communication styles
can lead to interpersonal tension. The next section will describe the common sources of
conflict and explain what teams can do to turn potential team liability into an asset.
CONFLICT
According to Forsyth (2010), conflict is “disagreement, discord, and friction that occur
when the actions or beliefs of one or more members of the group are unacceptable to and
F
resisted by one or more of the other group members” (p. 380). De Dreu and Weingart (2003)
define conflict as “the tension between teamI members because of real or perceived differences” (p. 741). Conflict is an inescapable part
N of working on a team. Any time individuals
work together, tensions can emerge as a result of different personalities, work habits, social
D pressures. Conflict can be caused by any
styles, and the stress of operating under time
number of issues, including misunderstandings,
L premature conclusions, innocent mistakes, or extenuating circumstances beyond the control of the team.
E as a sarcastic comment directed toward
Conflict can emerge from something as simple
a member who arrives late to a meeting orYa difference of opinion over the color of the
background on a PowerPoint presentation slide. It could stem from a struggle over the
, the time, organization, and frequency of
direction of the group; the breakdown of roles;
meetings; or any number of smaller details
people prioritize differently and for
S that
which they have different visions.
A The good news is that conflict can be manIt can even bring out the best in
R aged.
teams, depending on whether or not memA bers see it as an opportunity for team
development.
Many people think of conflict as bad,
5 counterproductive, and even destructive.
3 However, conflict is an important step in
group development and team perfor1 mance (Behfar, Mannix, Peterson, &
9 Trochim, 2011). Skilled leaders and mature
members who know how to recognize,
B address, and defuse conflict can manage it
U before it becomes destructive. The “storming” stage of group development described in Chapter 1 is often when conflict begins to
emerge. As groups struggle to find the best way to work together, differences are likely to
occur. The extent to which conflict becomes a positive force, capable of contributing to
productivity, creativity, and collaboration, depends upon the ability of members to communicate effectively, consider new perspectives, exercise patience, and not take things
personally.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
53
Conflict as an Everyday Phenomenon
Teams that avoid conflict may acquiesce to overly simplistic decisions and take the path of
least resistance in problem solving. In fact, Lencioni (2002) identifies fear of conflict as one
of the five typical problems or dysfunctions within teams. At the other end of the spectrum
are teams that experience excessive amounts of conflict where every statement is challenged or questioned and discussions get bogged down in the morass of unproductive
arguments. The latter type of conflict will often turn into interpersonal disputes and power
struggles. Thus, we begin our discussion about conflict with the assertion that an appropriate amount of conflict is needed for team success (Parayitam & Dooley, 2011), as demonF
strated in the figure below.
I
N
As social beings who live in community with others, we experience, witness, and sometimes
D
instigate conflict on a regular basis. Roommate
issues, romantic squabbles, and family
struggles are part of everyday life. Conflict
can
erupt
over remote controls, laptop computL
ers, phone usage, borrowed clothes, exes, sports teams, social cliques, political leanings,
E conflict can be difficult because it forces us to
and the list goes on. Generally speaking,
consider different points of view, to understand
other people’s preferences and priorities,
Y
and to accommodate others when we would rather do things our own way. Also, we battle
a perceived risk of “losing,” because we, allow our identity to be tied to our opinions, prefThe Relationship Between Conflict and Team Performance
erences, and desires, and then become too stubborn to compromise or concede. Too often
we revert to a fight or flight response in the face of interpersonal conflict, which rarely is
S
the best option.
Figure 3.2
A
R
The Relationship Between Conflict and Team Performance
A
5
3
1
9
B
U
PERFORMANCE
high
low
low
high
CONFLICT
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
54
Working in Teams
Once we are willing to view conflict as a common occurrence, it loses some of its gravity and can be approached from a pragmatic, less emotional perspective. Rather than thinking of it as a problem, or as a symptom of some bigger dysfunction, team members can
view conflict as something akin to a growing pain: perhaps a bit uncomfortable, but holding
the promise of development and creating just the right amount of creative friction to
improve team performance.
Levels of Conflict
Conflicts, or differences among members, can emerge from any number of sources.
F from which conflict can emerge. The easiForsyth (2010) has identified four specific areas
est conflicts to resolve are those involving a Idispute over facts or data. In those cases, there
is empirical evidence that can be examined in order to help resolve the disagreement.
N
Differences of opinion regarding how teams should accomplish their tasks or how they
define the purpose of the group are a bit more
D difficult to resolve. Ultimately, conflicts that
involve differences in values or beliefs are the most difficult to resolve because people are
L
less likely to compromise their core values. Forsyth describes these potential sources of
E
conflict as levels of conflict, explained below.
Level I: Facts or Data. Level I conflict involves conflict about facts or data. For example,
Y
either the attendee was late or wasn’t late, either it’s raining outside or it’s sunny, either the
,
experiment resulted in a statistically significant
difference or it didn’t. Arguments can
occur, though, when members don’t have all the data, or they interpret the data they do
have in different ways. But at least members have a starting place from which to begin a
S to reconcile their differences.
conversation (i.e., the data), in order to attempt
Level II: Processes or Methods. Level II conflict
occurs when group members disagree
A
about how something should be done. As groups work on various tasks, how they do it can
R rules, policies, and expectations, teams can
become a source of tension. By defining ground
deal with potential differences in an open and
Atransparent way. This set of standard operating principles, along with a detailed project plan, can minimize misunderstandings and
establish mutual accountability. For example, teams can agree upon ground rules, such as
the ones listed below, to guide their interaction
5 and minimize unnecessary conflict.
3
1
Be on time for meetings.
9
Put cell phones and unneeded laptops away.
B
Take risks by sharing true thoughts and innovative ideas.
U
Sample Ground Rules
1.
2.
3.
4. Participate freely and fully.
5. Appreciate other points of view even if you disagree.
6. Have fun.
Level III: Goals or Purpose. Moving from how to why becomes a bit more complicated:
Why are we here? Why are we working on this? What is the ultimate objective of our
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
55
coordinated effort? Without a unified vision, team members can begin pulling against one
another, and power struggles can erupt. And when a team is working under tight deadlines,
as most teams are, they cannot afford such inefficiencies. Because people tend to invest
themselves in the team’s overall direction, they can hold on tightly to their opinions
and argue less rationally than in Levels I or II. Problems can become drawn out, contentious,
and thorny.
Level IV: Values or Beliefs. Level IV conflict is the most deeply rooted and difficult to
resolve because it is tied to who we are. The values of group members are inextricably
linked to their identities, so unless they are willing to admit that they might be wrong, the
conflict is nearly permanent. As teams move from Level I through Level IV, the source of
F from the concrete to the abstract; thus, coming
conflict becomes less tangible. They move
to an agreement is more difficult. Resolving
I Level IV conflict depends upon both parties’
willingness to consider new perspectives, ask reflective questions, and depersonalize the
N
exchange as much as possible.
When a team is in the midst of a conflict,
D it can be helpful to identify in which level the
disagreement is rooted. Then members can be more aware of the source of tension in order
L
to be more efficient in resolving it. And in some conflicts, such as differences in goals or
E to disagree and move on.
values, members might just have to agree
Task Versus Relationship Conflict
Y
,
Conflict can be advantageous for teams, but it can also hinder performance (Greer, Saygi,
Aaldering, & De Dreu, 2012). When disagreements revolve around work tasks and do not
Sinformation processing, increase cognitive flexibecome personal, conflict can stimulate
bility, and improve creative thinking (De
A Dreu & Weingart, 2003). But conflict can also
immobilize teams and distract members from their work. In order to distinguish between
R researchers categorize conflict as either taskproductive and unproductive conflict, team
based or relationship-based. In general,A
moderate levels of task conflict can improve team
performance, whereas relationship conflict almost always has a negative effect on outcomes. And both types of conflict have a negative effect on member satisfaction (De Dreu
& Weingart, 2003).
5
Task or substantive conflict includes disagreements about the team’s tasks and goals. In
3
many cases, groups can use this type of conflict to increase creativity, make better plans,
and solve complex problems more thoughtfully
(Bradley, Postlethwaite, Klotz, Hamdani, &
1
Brown, 2012). Cross-functional teams or teams made up of members with different profes9
sional backgrounds bring divergent perspectives together to offer new perspectives and
B
ways of thinking. These deliberate differences
can be catalysts for innovation. In the case
of the Survivor teams, choosing a place
to
camp
is an important decision that requires
U
deliberation and thoughtful consideration. Those discussions might get heated, but they
are still important to have. It is only when arguments get personal that they become problematic for the teams.
Relationship or affective conflict includes disagreements among two or more group
members based upon differences in personal tastes or interpersonal style. It may come in
the form of a rivalry, old grudges, perceived disrespect, or a situation in which two personalities just do not get along. In addition, relationship conflict tends to have a strong
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
56
Working in Teams
emotional or affective component.
Group members who are experiencing this type of conflict tend to
have strong negative feelings
toward the person with whom they
are in conflict. Unfortunately, this
type of conflict is fairly common
and rarely useful (Chen, Sharma,
Edinger, Shapiro, & Farh, 2011).
According to Morrill (1995), 40% of
F
group conflict is rooted in conflict
among individuals that is unrelated
I
to group goals.
N
Though it may seem like a good
solution, forced cooperation often
D
aggravates relationship conflict. For
L
example, in order to resolve racial conflict as portrayed in the movie Remember the Titans,
E counterparts, the people with whom they
the coach made his players room with their racial
had intense interpersonal conflict, in order for them to get to know one another. Breaking
Y
down assumptions and stereotypes among conflicted parties is a reasonable solution, but
, get better. We will discuss productive conone that often makes matters worse before they
flict management at length in the coming sections.
If conflict is managed correctly, it can improve the quality of group decisions, stimulate
S a team. Conflict can be positive, but only
creativity, and build cohesion and trust within
insofar as it is appropriately addressed and managed.
According to Kruglanski and Webster
A
(1991), even task conflict that is initially productive can turn into relational conflict when
a group fails to reach a consensus on group R
decisions. Members can respond negatively to
individuals who challenge the status quo and
A“slow down the process” too much. Another
way task conflict can turn relational is when members are oversensitive and take things too
personally when they are challenged or disagreed with. Each person has a different way of
responding to conflict; this can impact whether
5 team conflict is productive or problematic,
as described in the next section.
3
1
Conflict Management Styles
9
Individuals respond to conflict in different ways. Some are averse to it, while others relish
B and Thomas (1977) created a conflict styles
the opportunity to banter and argue. Kilmann
model that builds upon the work of Blake and
U Mouton’s (1961) Managerial Grid presented
in Chapter 4, on leadership. There are five basic ways of responding to conflict based upon
an individual’s levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness, as depicted in the figure below.
Assertive behavior is defined as an attempt to satisfy one’s own concerns, while cooperative behavior is an attempt to satisfy the concerns of others.
A high level of assertiveness combined with a low level of cooperativeness describes a
competing conflict style. Conflict of this nature is more likely to occur in groups where
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
Assertiveness
Figure 3.3
57
Five Conflict Management Styles
High
(assertive)
Competing
Collaborative
Compromising
Low
(unassertive)
Avoiding
Accommodating
F
I
Low (uncooperative)
High (cooperative)
N
Cooperativeness
D
L
E
resources are scarce, as seen in the television show Survivor. People regress to deceptive
Y
and aggressive tendencies in competitive situations where there is perceived to be a clear
, create a zero-sum gain in which assertiveness
winner and a loser. These social contexts
outweighs cooperativeness. When people perceive that another person’s success constitutes their own failure, a hostile environment ensues.
Swith a low level of cooperativeness generates an
A low level of assertiveness combined
avoiding conflict style. People with this A
style tend to be disengaged and try to avoid conflict
at all costs. For various reasons, conflict is an extremely uncomfortable experience that
takes a heavy emotional toll. Yet, when R
individuals and groups avoid interpersonal tension
and strong differences of opinion among
Amembers, issues are not addressed and problems
go unresolved.
Team members who have a low level of assertiveness and a high level of cooperativeness
have an accommodating conflict style. 5
They are quick to give in to others and do what the
group wants in order to keep the peace. Often seen as ideal team players because of their
3to share their own ideas for fear of confrontation
pleasant personalities, they are reluctant
and challenge. They also have a difficult1time communicating their frustrations directly.
Competing is not necessarily bad, and accommodating is not necessarily good. In most
9
cases, collaborating is the optimal conflict style because it is an attempt to satisfy everyBlong-term results. But if a team cannot resolve a
one’s concerns and often yields the best
conflict in a collaborative way, compromising is the best alternative. When a group comU
promises, nobody is completely happy, as everyone has to give up a little in order to resolve
the differences.
For example, when a group of eight friends goes out to dinner, there may be a difference
of opinion about how to split the check. Just when the waiter is about to take everyone’s
order, a person with a competing conflict style who is about to order an expensive meal
might say, “Guys, there are so many of us, why don’t we just get one check and split it eight
ways?” As this is a predictable pattern his friends have seen before, the tension at the table
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
58
Working in Teams
begins to build. There are a number of options for splitting the check with certain options
favoring some more than others. Here are some possible ways to make the decision:
• Equity method: “Contribution-based distribution” in which each person is
responsible for what he or she has ordered.
• Equality method: “Blind justice” in which everyone pays one-eighth of the tab.
• Power method: “To the victor go the spoils” in which the dominant person gets to
decide.
• Need method: “Welfare-based justice” F
in which the tab is settled based on ability to
pay.
I
• Responsibility method: “Robin Hood justice” in which the money is taken from the
N
richest person and given to the neediest.
D
Different conflict styles will respond in different ways. Someone with an accommodatL
ing style will be quick to agree with the equality method even though he or she was not
E avoiding style is not going say anything in
going to order much food. Someone with an
hopes that the tension will pass, while someone with a collaborative style wants to put all
Y
the options on the table and evaluate them. How members address the tension depends
upon their level of assertiveness and desire ,to cooperate. If nothing is done, and the group
accepts the initial suggestion to split the check eight ways, people might get frustrated and
relationships may become strained. Addressing the conflict and coming to a reasonable
S
resolution is a much better option.
A
Negotiation and Conflict Resolution
R
Conflict travels a natural course from confrontation
A (conflict comes to existence), escalation
(it grows in intensity), and resolution (a tolerable outcome for the parties is reached). In
their seminal work, Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, Fisher, Ury, and
Patton (1991) of “The Harvard Negotiation Project”
designed an interest-based approach to
5
resolving conflict in a collaborative way. They based their work on four principles:
1.
2.
3.
4.
3
Separate the people from the problem
1
Focus on interests, not on positions 9
B
Invent options for mutual gain
U
Insist on objective criteria
Separate the People From the Problem
As noted earlier, task conflict can easily become personal. In the midst of an intense discussion about a critical team decision, members can get angry and frustrated with one another.
The first step in resolving the conflict is for members to separate the people with whom
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
59
they disagree from the actual points of disagreement. On a personal level, it’s important for
members to be aware of their own feelings and judgments of others. They have to be willing to be honest about their anger, frustration, and feelings of resentment. Perhaps it was
a fear of failure or a fear of rejection that caused them to react. Perhaps they didn’t think
others were giving them an appropriate amount of respect. Maybe they resented the team
for not using their ideas on a specific task or decision. Once members are hijacked by
the strong emotional feelings, it is easy to project negative motives and unfair assessments
onto others.
Once strong negative feelings have been identified, it may be helpful for members to go
to a trusted friend or mentor to get some perspective on the situation. An objective third
F and how to correct it. After processing the
party can help determine what went wrong
situation, members might need to go to Ithe person with whom they have the interpersonal
conflict in order to clear the air. That often includes trying to understand the other person’s
N
perspective, communicating one’s own, asking for forgiveness, and gaining a commitment
to work for the betterment of the team.D
One student described the following ritual to keep team problems from getting perL
sonal. At the beginning of every volleyball practice, his team members lined up with
E to the schedule for the day. When they crossed
their feet outside the court and listened
the line to begin practice, they committed themselves fully to the team and left everyY
thing else off the court. At times, players would get heated and become aggressive
because they all desperately wanted to,win a state championship. But at the end of every
practice, they all lined back up and walked off the court together, leaving the conflicts
on the court.
S
Focus on Interests, Not on Positions A
R on interests as a way to find commonality. The
Fisher, Ury, and Patton describe the focus
authors point out that people often entrench themselves in certain negotiating positions,
A
and that those positions necessarily lead to suboptimal outcomes for both parties. For
example, consider a boy who threatens to take his ball home if he doesn’t get to play quarterback in the after-school scrimmage with
5 his friends. His position, “I want to play quarterback,” might be posed against another boy’s position of wanting to play quarterback.
Either the second boy has to “give in,” or3everyone on the field “loses” because the first boy
will take his ball home in protest. If they
1 are able to focus on their interests, which might
be that they want to play football and how can they work this out, then they can give them9 to find creative solutions to the problem. By
selves the intellectual space, free of emotion,
focusing on common or respective interests,
B participants free themselves from distracting
emotions and complicating feelings so they can be creative, collaborative, and innovative
U
in their approach to reaching a solution.
Invent Options for Mutual Gain
Inventing options for mutual gain is the process of identifying potential solutions that
resolve the conflict and satisfy the needs of all parties. Once the overarching goal or interest has been articulated, the group can brainstorm possible options to achieve that goal.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
60
Working in Teams
Emotion is again a complicating factor here. Unless negotiators first separate the people
from the problem, and then focus on interests rather than positions, they will have difficulty inventing options for mutual gain.
As described in the previous example, the two boys squabbling over who gets to be
quarterback can come up with a number of mutually beneficial and acceptable options.
Perhaps the boys could take turns every other play or on every other possession; perhaps
they could play a series of short games that would allow a number of people to play quarterback. By backing away from the entrenched position of “if I don’t get to play quarterback, then nobody does,” negotiating parties have room to propose creative solutions and
invent options.
F
Insist on Objective Criteria
I
After the conflicted parties have invented a N
number of options to resolve the dispute, they
must make a decision and execute the best choice. Objective criteria are those things that,
D
when freed of emotional weight or implication, can serve to guide the decision-making
process to a mutually agreeable outcome. The
L way to determine objective criteria, according to the authors, is to address the issue openly and directly. What is a fair outcome? What
E
is the best way to achieve our interests and objectives? Are there data available to support
Y to any given conflict or problem, memvarious options? In order to find the best solution
bers need to agree on the facts of the issue and
, then have an objective framework for mak-
ing decisions. Chapter 7, on decision making, will discuss these frameworks in detail.
These four criteria offer a template for negotiation and conflict resolution across many
social contexts. They can help resolve conflict
S in personal relationships, work out tense
negotiations within project teams, or equip leaders in all environments with a basic set of
A negotiation, team members refuse to react.
skills for maintaining perspective. In principled
Instead, they reflect. They look past individual
R positions to find common interests that lead
to reasonable solutions.
A
EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE
5
3 dynamics of a team is the emotional and
One of the main influences on the interpersonal
social maturity of the leader and team members.
1 In the last few decades, a number of social
psychologists have emphasized the importance of emotional and social intelligence and its
relationship to interpersonal dynamics and 9
team effectiveness (Ghosh, Shuck, & Petrosko,
2012). Upon returning to his class reunionBat Harvard University, Dan Goleman (1995)
noticed that the most successful graduates had an interesting combination of emotional
maturity and social savvy. After collecting U
and analyzing data to test his hypotheses, he
soon created a model for emotional intelligence. In a subsequent book, Cherniss and
Goleman (2001) describe the personal and interpersonal competencies that are strong
predictors of personal and professional success. As seen in the following table, their findings suggest that the most effective team members are able to recognize and regulate emotions in themselves and others.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
Table 3.2
61
Emotional Intelligence
Recognition
(awareness)
Self
Personal Competence
Other
Social Competence
Self-Awareness
Emotional self-awareness
Accurate self-assessment
Self-confidence
Social Awareness
Empathy
Service orientation
Organizational awareness
F
I
N
D
L
E
Y
SOURCE: Adapted from Cherniss and Goleman (2001).
,
Regulation
(management)
Self-Management
Self-control
Trustworthiness
Conscientiousness
Adaptability
Achievement drive
Initiative
Relationship Management
Developing others
Influence
Communication
Conflict management
Leadership
Change catalyst
Building bonds
Teamwork and collaboration
A growing research base suggests that emotional intelligence is just as important to
professional success as cognitive intelligence
S (Cherniss & Goleman, 2001). For team projects, emotional intelligence may even be more important, given the interpersonal nature
A 2011). Group members bring various experiof teams (Chang, Sy, & Choi, 2012; Ghuman,
ences, goals, and attitudes to their groups.
R Differences inevitably emerge because no two
people are exactly alike. As a result, group experiences have the potential to trigger interAand emotional intelligence help minimize potenpersonal tensions. Interpersonal maturity
tial tensions among members. Leaders who have these skills are at an advantage because
they can model and facilitate appropriate interpersonal behavior on their teams (McKee,
5
Boyatzis, & Johnston, 2008).
3
1
COHESION
9
Early theorists defined cohesion simplyB
as the force that attracts members to one another
(Dion, 2000). Recent theorists acknowledge that cohesion is a complex, multidimensional
construct that influences both group U
performance and member satisfaction (Chang &
Bordia, 2001; Evans & Dion, 2012; Gully, Devine, & Whitney, 2012). Simply stated, cohesion
is the level of member commitment to the goals of the group (task cohesion) and to the
other members of the group (social cohesion). It can also be defined as the relative measure
of the closeness among group members and the strength of those connections. A cohesive
family, for example, is one that has regular contact and strong loyalty among members.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
62
Working in Teams
In cohesive groups, members are highly motivated to achieve their collective goals and,
at the same time, have a great deal of respect and concern for one another. Cohesion acts
as a lever to strengthen teams and propel them toward greater adherence and commitment
to group norms (Cohen & Bailey, 1997). Military organizations have long known the importance of cohesion. Soldiers certainly fight for their countries, but perhaps more important,
they fight for one another (Henderson, 1985). The importance of unit cohesion is introduced in boot camp and reinforced in subsequent training in order to prepare members for
actual combat, where cohesion can be a matter of life or death.
Creating cohesion or building “team spirit” requires deliberate attention. Groups that are
primarily task oriented may neglect this important aspect of their work. Allowing members
F of their group will help create both coheto participate in defining the goals and structure
sion and commitment. The following suggestions
can also help create cohesion:
I
• Information-sharing: Teams developNtrust when members know one another
(Purvanova, 2013). Thus, members develop confidence in one another by acquiring backD
ground information and observing current behavior. Members can do this by providing
information to the whole group or by sharing
L information in smaller pairs or subgroups
and then reporting back to the rest of the group. Cohesion is enhanced when members
E
identify with one another in terms of similar experiences, backgrounds, ideas, or opinions.
Y members feel valued and respected (Janss,
It is also built upon trust, which emerges when
Rispens, Segers, & Jehn, 2012).
,
• Team identity: Cohesive groups move from a collection of individuals to a single entity
with its own identity and unique characteristics. Simple activities like identifying a team
name or constructing a vision for the groupS
may help members see themselves as part of
a greater whole. Not surprisingly, members of
Ahighly cohesive groups have the tendency to
use more plural pronouns than personal pronouns when talking about themselves and
their accomplishments (i.e., “We closed the R
deal”).
A catalyst in motivating members and help• Competition: Competition can be a strong
ing them commit to a common task. Between-group competition is a well-known strategy
in “rallying the troops,” building momentum, and stimulating group commitment.
5
When teams are cohesive, they have the potential
of achieving greater results and, at the
3
same time, providing a more meaningful experience for members. This holds true for
1
groups in general but especially for sports teams (Pescosolido & Saavedra, 2012). In an
article written for Sports Illustrated, Chris 9
Ballard (2010) studied interpersonal behavior
within professional sports teams. He examined data that compared the number of instances
B
of encouraging physical contact such as high-fives, chest bumps, head pats, and butt slaps
with a team’s winning percentage. The data U
revealed that championship teams had significantly greater numbers of these “positive” or “encouraging” behaviors than did other teams.
In fact, there was a statistically significant positive correlation between the number of
touches between teammates and the number of team wins. The “high-five” actually serves
two purposes. It demonstrates a teammate’s appreciation of a job well done, and it also is a
means of picking up a struggling comrade. This gesture of goodwill builds cohesion
and positively impacts both team process and team performance. When team members
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
63
encourage and support one another, they are not only more motivated, they also perform
at a higher level (Hüffmeier & Hertel, 2011).
LEADERSHIP IN ACTION
Conflict is a normal part of group functioning. When people work together in teams, there
are bound to be tensions, challenges, misunderstandings, miscommunications, and a
whole host of pet peeves that get triggered. As described in this chapter, conflict has its
origin in the differences among members:
F differences of expectation versus reality; of message sent versus message received; of implication versus inference; of varying work styles,
I of competing visions or understandings of an
social styles, and communication styles;
assignment, and so on. Whether the group
N is a team on a sports field, a team in a classroom, a team on a backpacking trip, or a team in a professional setting, these differences
D
lead to conflict.
In order to manage conflict productively,
L there are a few values that must be established
early in the life of a group. This happens superficially during the forming stage, which is
E
one reason why storming eventually happens. One way to help minimize the discomfort
Y
and duration of the storming stage is to encourage
the team to discuss goals during the first
meeting. Are some members working primarily
for
personal gain? Are others committed
,
to the collective success of the team? Are still others just wishing to do as little work as
possible? Questions like these will bring important information into the open so that it can
be addressed in a proactive way. This, inS
turn, will prepare the team for any “storming” that
occurs because there will be an established set of values to which they can refer. Without
Aof drifting away from their purpose and comproa shared value system, teams run the risk
mising their potential.
R
A next step in this process involves asking questions about work styles. Are there some
A
people who are very concerned with everyone
arriving on time? Are there some who have
challenging schedules? Are there some who need a lot of structure, while others prefer to
figure it out as they go? When it comes to scheduling, are there some who have unavoid5
able conflicts? As for structure, it may be helpful to suggest formal roles and responsibilities
(e.g., logistics, note-taking, research lead,
3meeting facilitator, etc.) to avoid ambiguity, social
loafing, and the risk of overlooked details. These types of questions will help the team avoid
1
unnecessary conflicts down the road.
9a common objective, differences of opinion about
As teams work together to accomplish
how to get the work done are almost guaranteed. One of the roles of a leader is that of
B
mediator. To do that, one can call upon the guidelines from Fisher, Ury, and Patton (1991).
U Then, focus on interests, not on positions.
First, separate the people from the problem.
Third, invent options for mutual gain. And, finally, insist on objective criteria. These four
characteristics of effective negotiation can help teams save time, energy, and relationships
as they achieve results by limiting the potential damage of interpersonal conflict.
You can separate the people from the problem by reminding yourself to focus on the
data and not on the actor. This is essentially depersonalizing the environment and moving
from an oppositional dynamic to at least a neutral one. When combined with active and
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
64
Working in Teams
reflective listening skills and “I” statements, you can isolate problems and deal with them
objectively.
Once you isolate the problem, it is much easier to focus on interests. Positions are largely
emotional. Interests, however, are much more substantive. Perhaps one team member is
interested in doing her best, another is trying to juggle multiple projects, and yet another is
interested in being promoted to a leadership position. Until you identify their respective
interests, you will find yourself and your teammates struggling to collaborate and, perhaps,
even be in conflict with one another. You can avoid much of this by establishing a climate
and culture of candid communication within your group from the first meeting.
Inventing options for mutual gain is a fun and exhilarating process. Having isolated
F interests, your team is free to creatively
the problem and trained your attention on
explore options that are valued by every member.
Note: The options must be invented,
I
so push your team to be creative and innovative. This is about exchanging value, so
N
work to find things that are valuable to each member. If someone needs more free time,
find a way to offer that in exchange for some
D other investment on their part. If a member wants to ensure a top-quality product, consider exchanging ownership of the project
L
for something else.
None of this is possible without objectiveE
criteria. “Objective criteria” means that either
something is . . . or it isn’t, and the judgment-free, empirical data will allow your team to
Y
operate from a position of shared understanding, equal footing, and agreed-upon standards. To do this effectively, you will have,to define a common set of criteria to which
everyone agrees and work diligently as a team to adhere to the standards.
Interpersonal dynamics and conflict is more than just managing differences of style and
S
opinion. Rather, a major portion of team leadership
and interpersonal management has to
do with building community, affiliation, and
cohesion.
Team-building efforts create an
A
environment for members to establish common bonds based on shared interests, shared
experiences, shared hardship, and a sharedR
commitment to one another and to the team.
Team performance can be improved by spending
A time together in various nonwork activities. Perhaps the team could benefit from an afternoon of laser tag, paint ball, or bowling,
or by participating in a Habitat for Humanity building day, or by volunteering at a local
homeless shelter. These common experiences
5 and shared investments lay a foundation of
trust, familiarity, and mutual concern.
Descriptive norms 45
Injunctive norms 45
Ongoing self-evaluation 47
Ethical standards of behavior
Analytic social style 48
Driver social style 48
Expressive social style 48
3
1
K E Y T E9
RMS
B social style 48
Amiable
Competing
conflict style
U
47
56
Avoiding conflict style 57
Accommodating conflict style 57
Collaborating conflict style 57
Compromising conflict style 57
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 3 Interpersonal Dynamics and Conflict
65
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. In order to assess the socio-emotional environment of a group, an observer might ask a
question such as “Do members seem to enjoy working together?” Name two more questions
you might ask.
2. Explain the difference between descriptive norms and injunctive norms. Describe the four
ways norms can develop.
3. Group members can be classified into one of four social styles. Name and describe each of
F
the styles.
4. Describe the interpersonal circumplex and Ithe two dimensions associated with it.
N
5. Describe the six types of interpersonal challenges
identified by the Inventory of
Interpersonal Problems.
D
6. Sources of conflict can be found in any oneLof four distinct levels. Name and describe the
levels and give a personal example of each.
E
Y
Explain how information-sharing, group identity, and competition may help to facilitate
,
group cohesion.
7. Name and describe the five conflict styles. Which is the most ideal, and why?
8.
S
A
EXERCISE 3.1 FEELING THE BURN R
A
GROUP ACTIVITIES
The interpersonal dynamics among team members can be challenging, especially when
deadlines loom, personalities clash, and tempers flare. This exercise is designed to study
the effects of tension in a group setting5
and to explore ways of coping with frustration.
Every member of the class should receive three strips of paper, a marker, and a strip of
3 one of the following prompts:
masking tape. Each strip of paper will have
1
9
I show my frustration by ____________________________________________.
B me, I would feel ____________________.
If my teammates were frustrated with
U
• I feel frustrated when my teammates __________________________________.
•
•
You are to write down your first response to each prompt without censoring your
thoughts or minimizing your true feelings. After you’ve written your responses down, tape
each of the strips in a public place such as a wall, whiteboard, or desk so everyone can see
them. Please write your responses clearly so that classmates will be able to read them. Take
a few minutes to read the responses that other people have posted.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
66
Working in Teams
Form groups of four to six students and process your reactions to everyone’s responses.
Come up with a list of the typical reasons why people become frustrated with one another
and the best ways to deal with it.
EXERCISE 3.2 IDEAL TEAM NORMS
Form groups of four and create a list of ideal team norms. In order to get a more comprehensive list, complete the following statement: “I work best in teams when _______________.”
Record your answers on the board. Rank-order the list from norms that are easiest to follow
to norms that are hardest to follow. IncludeF
a plan of what a team should do if a member
violates one or more of the norms. In other Iwords, how can a team enforce group norms?
N
D
L is not showing up for meetings and doesn’t
A project team member in one of your classes
pay attention when he does attend. Instead,E
when he shows up, he is texting and browsing
on Facebook. However, he is very talented and would be a great asset to the team if he
Y
would earnestly engage. He is a charming, charismatic,
and popular guy on campus who
could be a great presenter for the final project
that
is
due at the end of the semester.
,
CASE 3.2: DISSIDENCE AMONG THE RANKS
Already, though, people on your team are getting frustrated and talking behind his back
about what a bad teammate he is. Finally, your teammate, April, is pushed to the breaking
point during a team meeting and slams her S
booked down on the table, unleashing a tirade
on him because he’s not paying attention. April also rips him for coming late to meetings
A responsibility that will cost the project team
and for not following through on a recent, key
valuable time. She tells him, “If you don’t want
R to be here, we don’t want you here. Why
don’t you just do us all a favor and drop the class?!” As soon as she finishes, James, another
A
one of your teammates, says, “Chill out, April. It’s not that big a deal. Let’s just get back to
work.” The rest of the team falls silent and clams up.
5
3
1
9
B
U
• You’re the leader of this team . . . what would you do?
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
C H A P T E R
4
Leadership
F
I
N
Team leadership is the practice of enlisting
and overseeing others in the pursuit of shared
D seeks to inspire others to the highest levels of
goals. In contrast to management, leadership
individual, team, and organizational performance.
Whereas managers focus on planning,
L
organizing, and controlling, leadership involves vision, networking, and consensusE will possess good management skills, the conbuilding (Kotter, 1998). While good leaders
verse is not always true. Leaders mustYbe able to foster communication, cohesion, and
commitment within their teams. After looking at a brief overview of management trends
,
in organizations, we will survey the major theories of leadership, discuss the five practices
of exemplary leaders, and describe how leaders can influence and persuade others. We
conclude with specific strategies for conducting effective meetings.
S
A
CASE 4.1: COGENT
R HEALTHCARE
A
Brentwood, Tennessee, is home to a health care company that specializes in hospital medicine, an emerging specialty with an impressive year-over-year increase in demand. This company has experienced 24% compounded
annual growth and has recently doubled in revenue and
5 headcount. With over 1,100 physicians employed in over
130 hospitals and clinics across the United States and fewer than 200 employees running the corporate head3
quarters, this business relies on a distributive leadership model to make sure that the clinical services and business
1 standards.
operations run smoothly, efficiently, and up to the highest
From the executive suite down to the hospital or “program”
level, the company is broken down into leadership
9
“dyads” of a clinical leader and an operations leader. The chief operating officer and chief clinical officer distribB officers and regional chief medical officers, who in turn
ute leadership responsibility over regional chief operating
U medical directors. This “role-player” model has proven
divide responsibility for program managers and program
successful with world champion sports teams, on paramedical teams, and within military Special Forces teams. A
vital component of this model, however, is training, team-building, and the establishment of trust.
One of the key differentiators for this rapidly growing company is the investment it makes in the ongoing
development of its human capital. It is one of the few health care companies of any size with a dedicated Organizational Development (OD) department, which has developed an academy model that is designed to meet the
advancing needs of the corporate staff, the field support staff, the clinicians, and the hospital program and
67
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
68
Working in Teams
regional leadership teams. The academy model is self-buttressing, meaning that it supports itself by crossreferencing courses and training different program-level role players in unison. For example, in the initial “level 1”
training program, the operations leadership and the clinical leadership team members learn the same fundamentals, laying a foundation for understanding, trust, and interdependence across the footprint of the company. This
uniformity helps everyone who has attended the level 1 academy speak the same language, share the same
expectations, and understand the baseline knowledge.
As they advance, the leaders participate in more specialized skills training that complements the work they do.
Whether that training focuses on managing finances or managing physician performance, these team leaders are
trained to be fully competent and on the cutting edge of their own specialization, and to understand the language
of their counterpart. This ensures ongoing communicationFand transparency between co-leaders of very highpressure, high-stress program sites, which prepares these leadership
teams for the daily demands of the volatile
I
hospital environment.
N
The advanced leadership training, the third level of the academy model, is designed around a “live case” strucD problem that is facing its hospital team—such as
ture, which requires the leadership “dyad” to bring an actual
floundering patient satisfaction scores or a strained relationship
L with the hospital administration—to the training
event. Each team’s “live case” is used in every module or session in the training in order to lend context to the
E
material and to create a bridge between theory and practice. The academy takes each team through a series of
Y performance (to name a few), and each session
sessions about managing culture, relationships, conflict, and
involves table exercises designed to force the teams to develop
, a change initiative to resolve the problem. By the
end of the seminar, each leadership team weaves together an integrated and multifaceted change plan, complete
with milestones. These detailed plans are shared with the regional leaders for the sake of accountability and follow-through, improving the execution and implementation S
of those initiatives.
It is estimated that the company invests almost $10,000
Aper year on the development of each of its top leaders, not including the money allocated for “continuing medical education” (known as “CME”) credits. The figure
R it is a significant amount of money that surprises
decreases for employees who bear less responsibility, and while
many business leaders across industries, it has proven valuable
A in driving business performance and retention of
the company’s “top talent.” In the time that these academies have been instituted, average length of physician
tenure has doubled, the company-wide turnover rate is the best it has been in the company’s history, and the
5
quality-based incentive bonuses that programs earn have increased
across the company. Given the annual revenue
of the company, the decreased costs associated with turnover,
3 and the training of new employees—not to mention
the intangible value of improved client satisfaction and industry reputation—the investment in leadership develop1
ment has more than justified itself.
9
Case Study Discussion Questions
B
U business, education, and the military? How do
1. What common needs exist on teams in health care, sports,
you think leadership addresses those needs?
2. How does Cogent Healthcare justify its investment in leadership development? What are the tangible shortand long-term benefits?
3. What is the best way to train leaders? Describe the Cogent Healthcare leadership development model.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 4 Leadership
69
For generations, leaders and supervisors have used their positional power to issue commands and control subordinates’ behavior. They relied largely on the promise of reward and
the threat of punishment to manage and motivate employees. This business model was
designed by powerful men such as J. P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, and John D. Rockefeller Sr.
in the early 1900s to run their growing companies (Kayser, 1994). As the United States transitioned from an agrarian to an industrialized economy, factories and organizations sought
raw material and human labor to an unprecedented extent. To meet their needs, companies
hired thousands of employees who, subsequently, needed to be managed and organized.
Supervisors and foremen had almost total power to hire, fire, reward, and punish those who
worked for them. Workers were given direction, evaluated, and then either rewarded or punF 1979). But today’s competitive and fast-paced
ished based upon their performance (Edwards,
global economy requires a new organizational
model that shares power and capitalizes on
I
the collective wisdom of groups and teams (Guillen, 1994; Senge, 1990).
N
D
SELF-MANAGED WORK TEAMS
L
The most successful organizations areE
flexible, innovative, and collaborative in order to
maximize the strengths of an increasingly
Y educated and diverse workforce. Hierarchical
command and control systems that emphasize authority and compliance are out of fashion
, (Pfeffer, 1992). Some authors have coined this
and, ultimately, ineffective in the long term
new autonomy-granting phenomenon as the second industrial revolution, postulating that
it may represent as profound a change as the first industrial revolution of the eighteenth
S
and nineteenth centuries (Fisher, 2000).
Self-managed work teams (SMWTs)A
are more than groups of people working together
to accomplish tasks defined by their managers. SMWTs are, as their name implies, truly
R
self-managed. These teams hold responsibility for the entire process: goal-setting, creating
A
a project plan, dividing up the tasks, assigning
responsibilities, and allocating compensation. For example, W. L. Gore and associates, the company that produces GORE-TEX, makes
significant use of self-directed work teams. Job titles do not exist at Gore. Rather, every
5 when it comes to compensation, the associates
employee is known as an “associate,” and
are evaluated by their entire team.
3
SMWTs share power by allowing members to participate in important decisions and to
volunteer for leadership opportunities 1
(Oh, 2012). When individuals are empowered and
motivated, they are more committed to
9 the team’s success and feel a greater sense of
involvement in the process (McIntyre & Foti, 2013). In these types of teams, discussions
tend to be more dynamic and innovativeB
as members share different perspectives and work
collaboratively to find the best answers and
U solutions (Bergman, Rentsch, Small, Davenport,
& Bergman, 2012). Members realize they can use their personal power to influence group
behavior and improve team performance. Shared power, then, allows individual members
to exert their opinions and positively influence group decisions and actions. As Johnson
and Johnson (2006) suggest, “The effectiveness of any group is improved when power is
relatively mutual among its members and power is based on competence, expertise, and
information” (p. 240). Shared power based upon competence as opposed to position grants
all members the opportunity to contribute to team success.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
70
Working in Teams
LEADERSHIP AND GENDER
For most of human history, men have occupied positions of power and have enjoyed
privilege in nearly all its forms. Indeed, most of the storied leaders around the world are
men, and most of today’s revered CEOs and titans of industry are men. However, in a 2010
article from The Atlantic magazine entitled “The End of Men,” author Hanna Rosin wonders
if the golden age of male leadership is coming to an end.
Rosin’s exposition on the advancement of women leaders is based in the argument that
“the postindustrial economy is indifferent to men’s size and strength. The attributes that
are most valuable today—social intelligence, open communication, the ability to sit still
F
and focus—are, at a minimum, not predominantly male. In fact, the opposite may be true.”
I roles and strengths of men and women are
Rosin argues that the historical or traditional
social constructs more than they are biological
N ones. Her conclusion, therefore, is that the
dominance of males—even in leadership positions—is on the decline. She states, “As thinkDphysical strength and stamina as the keys to
ing and communicating have come to eclipse
economic success, those societies that take L
advantage of the talents of all their adults, not
just half of them, have pulled away from the rest.” If physical strength and size no longer
command attention and respect, it follows E
that people with the greatest skill in the most
valuable areas (in Rosin’s argument, these areas
Y are thinking, communicating, perspectivetaking, and social intelligence) are the ones who will ascend to leadership positions.
Leaders are only effective to the extent to, which they can influence their environment
and their team. These factors may, indeed, have been influenced by certain social constructs or constraints in the past, but the world is in transition. The knowledge, skills, and
S
abilities that lead to success are based upon communication, cooperation, and collaboration. And these can be developed, refined, and
A acquired by men and women alike.
THEORIES OF LEADERSHIP
R
A
Leadership is a hotly contested subject in academic and organizational settings. Not every5
one agrees on what constitutes effective leadership. Kotter (1985) makes a strong argument
that as the workplace continues to become more
3 competitive and complex, issues of leadership, power, and influence will become increasingly important. Work teams today are
1
also contending with the ever-increasing pressure to solve complex, multidimensional
9 leader today must manage “thousands of
problems at lightning speed. The typical team
interdependent relationships—linkages to people, groups, or organizations” (Kotter, 1985,
B
p. 23). Though relatively straight-forward tasks and goals can usually be accomplished
through simple structures and concrete roleU
assignments, solving more complex problems
is a more difficult process. Teams have to figure out how to generate, evaluate, and implement innovative solutions to new and unforeseen problems. Leadership models that can
catalyze and monitor this process while empowering and developing team members are at
the very heart of effective leadership (Pfeffer, 1992).
Blake and Mouton (1961) created the Managerial Grid to graphically represent the balance between task and relationship. Their model suggests that the best leaders have a high
concern for both people and production or results.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 4 Leadership
Table 4.1
Managerial Grid
High
Concern
for People
71
Country club management
Middle of the road
management
Medium
Low
Team management
Impoverished
management
Authority-compliance
Medium
High
F
I
Concern
for Production (task)
N
SOURCE: Adapted from tBlake and Mouton (1961).
D
L people than production, their style is friendly and
When leaders are more concerned with
nonconfrontational. When production is given priority over the value of people, the use of
E
authority to enforce compliance is the norm. When leaders are passive and detached from
both the people and tasks of their team,Ythe management style is impoverished. The ideal
leadership style in this model is to value,and invest in people while simultaneously creating
Low
accountability and the expectation of task achievement (Arana, Chambel, Curral, & Tabernero,
2009). The following section describes some of the most common models of leadership.
S
A
In the early 1900s, leadership researchers
R assumed that great leaders had a consistent set
of innate traits that set them apart from followers. Researchers believed that once people
A
knew which personality traits were associated
with success, they could identify potential
Trait Theories
leaders and put them into positions that would maximize those traits. According to this
reasoning, identification was crucial because the personality traits associated with effective
5
leadership were only present in extraordinary people and could not be developed in people
lacking such traits. Although this was a3reasonable and systematic approach at the time,
researchers were disappointed when they were not able to identify a common set of traits
1
present in successful leaders. Research by Mann (1959) and Stogdill (1948) shattered the
illusion that great leaders are born with 9
certain characteristics; the data simply did not support that position.
B
More recent research has used characteristics of the five factor model of personality
U agreeableness, and neuroticism) to examine
(openness, conscientiousness, extraversion,
leadership qualities. Traits within the five factor model tend to be relatively stable throughout
life and are thus categorized as personality traits rather than learned behavior or transitional
states. Using this model, leadership researchers found significant differences between leaders
and followers. The most effective leaders, on average, exhibit higher levels of extraversion
(outgoingness and assertiveness), conscientiousness (diligence and work ethic), and openness (flexibility and creativity) (McCrae & Costa, 1987). Not surprisingly, the most effective
leaders work well with others, get things done, and find innovative ways to solve problems.
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
72
Working in Teams
Contingency Theories
As behavioral researchers were observing leaders in various settings, they found that a
consistent style of leadership did not always work for every situation. In other words, certain styles of leadership work better depending on the specific task, composition, and
context of the group. Out of these observations emerged a theory of leadership that posits
the importance of matching leader behaviors with the context. Contingency theories rest
upon the assumption that leadership styles must adapt to changing team conditions in
order to be most effective.
Situational leadership is a well-known contingency theory of leadership developed by
Blanchard and Hersey (Blanchard, Zigarmi, &FZigarmi, 1999; Hersey, 1985). This theory suggests that leaders are defined by two things: the amount of direction they give and the
I
amount of support they give. A team leader who is highly directive gives detailed information
Nhow they should do it. Leaders who are supto members about what needs to be done and
portive give a lot of encouragement to othersDand empower them to figure out the best way
to get their job done. There are four possible leadership styles, depending on the amount of
L
direction and support a team leader gives: directing,
coaching, supporting, and delegating.
E
Y
,
High
S
Supporting
Coaching
A
R
A
Supportive
Behavior
Delegating
5
Low
Low
Directing
3
1
9
B
U Directive Behavior
High
While individual leaders might have a preferred style of leadership, Blanchard and
Hersey believe the most effective leadership style depends on the team.
Situational leadership theory asserts that leadership style must be fluid and dependent
on the developmental level of team members (DeRue, Barnes, & Morgeson, 2010). When
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
CHAPTER 4 Leadership
73
teams are in the forming stage of development, members are not exactly sure how they will
contribute or how the team will function together. The team is in an early developmental
stage exhibiting characteristics of low competence as a team but high commitment. At this
stage, members respond best to a leader who provides a lot of structure and uses a directing style of leadership. As the team develops, members increase their level of competence
but lose some of their initial motivation for the task. Thus, the leader must maintain a high
level of directiveness while also providing high levels of support and encouragement. This
style of leadership is called coaching. As members become competent in their abilities,
they require less direction but still need support. Thus, the supporting style helps maintain
high levels of commitment to the task. Finally, as members develop competence and interF is delegating. At this stage, members are able to
nal motivation, the ideal leadership style
accomplish the tasks they are assignedIwith little support or direction. This variable style
of leadership is well suited to the changing needs of developing groups. Situational leaders
N
start with a directing style and end up with a delegating style.
D
Transformational Leadership
L
Transformational leadership is a theoryE
of leadership that describes the process by which
leaders transform a group of individuals into a cohesive team that is committed to the highYupon the ability of leaders to inspire others to go
est levels of success (Bass, 1998). It relies
beyond mere compliance by encouraging
, them to take ownership of a task or project and
to identify with the results. Transformational leaders are visionaries who empower others
to accomplish great feats. They lead by example and are able to enlist others to take on
great challenges. Transactional leadership,
S in contrast, focuses on the management of tasks
and is defined as the transaction between a manager and an employee. It relies upon strucA
ture, accountability, and a reward system to ensure that work is getting done.
Transformational leaders use influence
R strategies such as inspirational appeal, consultation, and personal appeal to garner the highest levels of commitment. Similarly, they use
A
referent or expert bases of power to motivate others, as opposed to coercive or legitimate
power, which may foster resentment. These leaders would rather have members volunteer
for tasks than force them to comply. Thus, transformational leadership tends to generate a
5
deep sense of loyalty to the team and commitment to the task.
3 transformational leader. There are certainly
Steve Jobs is an example of an inspiring,
tales of his occasional heavy-handedness
1 and slavish dedication to a singular vision, but
shortly after his death in 2011, many of his former colleagues and direct reports shared
detailed stories of how he brought out9the best in his employees. He had an appealing
genius about him, according to many, and
B he was uncompromising in his pursuit of innovative solutions, user-friendly designs, and exceptional results. The teams that survived the
UApple, its mission, and to Jobs himself. The result,
intensity of his style were fiercely loyal to
obviously, has been a series of historic and influential products including the iPod, iPad,
and iPhone that have revolutionized technology and communication.
Primal Leadership
Primal leadership is a theory of leadership that emphasizes the emotional and social maturity of the leader (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2004). Emotional intelligence, as we have
FOR THE USE OF SAVANT LEARNING SYSTEMS STUDENTS AND FACULTY ONLY.
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION, SALE, OR REPRINTING.
ANY AND ALL UNAUTHORIZED USE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
Copyright © 2015 by SAGE Publications, Inc.
74
Working in Teams
discussed in Chapter 3, on interpersonal dynamics, begins with the ability to recognize and
manage one’s own emotions. Being aware of feelings such as anger or irritation and being
able to manage those feelings is the foundation of emotional intelligence. If leaders are not
aware of their own feelings and do not have an accurate understanding of their own
strengths and weaknesses, they will not be able to manage their teams effectively. In this
regard, healthy self-esteem is not thinking too highly of oneself, and it’s not thinking too
poorly of oneself; it’s thinking accurately about oneself.
The second half of emotional intelligence is the ability to understand and manage relationships. Leaders must have social awareness and the ability to accurately read others.
More specifically, they need to recognize how they are personally affecting their team
F effectiveness and make changes, if necesmembers. This allows leaders to evaluate their
sary. One of the reasons why the fictitious character
Michael Scott, from the award-winning
I
TV show The Office, is so funny is that he has absolutely no idea how foolish he appears to
N
others. He has neither self-awareness nor social awareness, which can be quite humorous
as he tries to lead his team. Ultimately, effective
D leaders need emotional intelligence in
order to know themselves and to inspire others. Furthermore, when interpersonal tensions
L
build, leaders need social maturity to accurately diagnose the situation and to intervene
E
with a level head.
Y
,
Leadership Development Plan
1. Where am I now?
Sin the future?
2. Where do I want to be
3. What do I need to doA
to get there?
R
A
Most of us have had irritable, moody managers or supervisors who made our working
lives miserable. Bosses can have a significant impact on the atmosphere of a team. Not only
are emotions subconsciously perceived on 5
a neurological level, they tend to be mirrored
by others (Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee, 2001). The mood or emotions of a team leader
3 or negative, in the rest of the team. For this
often generate similar emotions, either positive
reason, Goleman and his colleagues suggest 1
that leaders need to be aware of their emotions
and how their moods impact their teams. They assert that if team leaders are to be consistently successful over a long period of time,9they need to regulate their moods while still
being authentic and genuine. If they are angry,
B stressed, or upset but try to act superficially
playful or artificially positive, the team will know. It is better for them to be aware of their
U setting than to cover them up and pretend
emotions and deal with them in an appropriate
that nothing is wrong.
Another distinguishing characteristic of primal leadership is its emphasis on intentional
leadership development. Goldman and his associates believe that leaders can be developed
by following a specific process. First, individuals need to know their strengths and
weaknesses. They can e...
Purchase answer to see full
attachment