Mainly for Students: Group thinking

With their first term at an end, many first-year university students have already undertaken some of their course work on a group basis. Sometimes groups are self-selected and sometimes they are chosen by staff, as is broadly similar in industry practice, where selections may be made by senior management. For some it may have gone well and been a truly rewarding experience of working in a high performing team, but for others it may have been a disappointing, frustrating and at worst a destructive experience. For many, it may have been somewhere in between. Whatever the case, universities are not going to stop setting group coursework – and crucially, the skills and attributes that can come from working with others is something employers look for in graduates seeking work. Moreover, teamworking is part of one of the RICS’s mandatory competences expected of qualifying members. The Diversity, Inclusion and Teamworking competence covers “the role of the surveyor within the team and their involvement with the establishment of the team. It deals with how team members interact, their behaviour and communication. It also looks at how to build a diverse and inclusive team and the resulting benefits for both the individual and the team”. Groups Let us begin by exploring the notion of a “group”. The late psychologist and business theorist Edgar Schein very simply defined a group as follows: “any number of people who interact with each other, are psychologically aware of each other, and who perceive themselves to be a group.” On the basis of this definition, which of the below list could be categorised as a group?: People at a bus stop Shoppers queuing at a Boxing Day sale A family out cycling Footballers on a pitch Members of a property sales and letting department Filmgoers at a cinema The board of a large property company People eating in a café Four students working together in undertaking a university task While any collection of people may be perceived as a group, they may not in fact actually be operating as such. Groups are thus much more than a collection of individuals. And what of teams? Is there any difference between a group and team? Might any of the above categories be considered a team and why (see further below)? Groups can be classified on two simple bases: where the members of a group are in constant contact (formally and sometimes informally); or where they only do so more occasionally as needs be (again formally and sometimes informally). Formal groups are set up within a surveying practice, or part of a university course, to undertake particular tasks or to formally compartmentalise particular areas of business activity or client focus, eg an investment agency department. Such groups generally comprise a leader or manager and their subordinates who meet and work together. Informal groups are those formed by people typically with a common interest and are not directed by anyone outside the group. But how do groups behave? Group activities, sentiments and interactions Sociologist George Homans, in his seminal work The Human Group (1950), split the behaviour of groups into three sets of characteristics: activities, sentiments and interactions. a) Activities are what people actually do in groups. They may be undertaken to satisfy group objectives, individual objectives or to maintain group harmony. b) Sentiments are values, beliefs and attitudes held by individuals within a group. These sentiments may be transmitted from an individual into the rest of a group or passed from a group to an individual. c) Interactions are the social interactions which occur between members of a group. Interaction may be directed towards achieving group or individual goals or towards maintaining group harmony. In setting up a group to undertake a shared task, and before getting on with the “what” of the actual work, it might be helpful to discuss the above characteristics, as regards the “how” and “why” and “when” of the project. This brings us to “behaviours”. Group behaviours The psychologist William Marston set out four basic behavioural characteristics that people possess in any combination, which may operate differently in different circumstances: the so-called DISC theory. These characteristics are described as follows Dominance: wanting to lead or manage, take control and get results. Influence: enjoys sharing ideas, getting on with people and networking. Steadiness: supports others where tasks and responsibilities are clearly set out. Conscientiousness: good at attention to detail and the acquisition of all the resources and knowledge needed to complete a task. Once formed, and given the above, groups will work with behaviours that have been described as either “required” or “emergent” in character, but may often be a mixture of the two. Required behaviours are those which an organisation considers to be necessary for a group to function and achieve its goals. These will often be set explicitly before any activities take place or may be imposed by a manager or leader at some point in a group’s operation. This is also very much like the situation of the expectations of university staff in setting up a group coursework task – or should be. This would include things like electing a student team leader, meetings organiser and minute taker and expected behaviours required for undertaking tasks and meeting associated deadlines. Emergent behaviours are those which actually happen once a group is in operation. As such, emergent behaviours may or may not align with an organisation’s or student group’s required behaviours. Emergent behaviours may in fact develop to fulfil different individuals’ own needs and may be opposed to the required behaviours which have been set. This can be true of student group coursework, where interpersonal behaviours may exceed or fall short of the required behaviours of group work. The tension between required and emergent behaviours may therefore be critical to achieving the objectives of any organisation or coursework task. Successful outcomes will only result, arguably, from a fusion of required and positive emergent behaviours. Group goals It should be clear from the above that behaviour may be directed towards achieving group goals, individual goals or to maintaining group harmony. These three behaviour types can be classified as: task-orientated, self-orientated and maintenance-orientated. Task-orientated behaviour is concerned with achieving the objectives of the group. Examples include: Seeking information, asking for facts or opinions from group members. Supporting group member’s initiatives and actions. Summarising progress towards the achievements of group goals. Self-orientated behaviour is directed towards the achievement of individual objectives of the group. Some behaviours may be closely allied to maintenance-orientated behaviours, although the motives would be different. Examples include: Attacking or rejecting other individuals within a group or defensively strengthening one’s own position. Withdrawing: failing to make contributions to a group and, worse still, not acknowledging it. Point-scoring: seeking to enhance one’s own reputation or standing by scoring points from other members of a group. Blocking tactics designed to impede other individuals’ initiatives or ideas within a group and, worse still, not giving sound rationale reasons for doing so. Maintenance-orientated behaviours are concerned with maintaining the morale and harmony of a group and the individual members in it. Examples include: Encouraging and providing a warm and supportive response to the initiatives and actions of others. Opening: bringing in individuals who have yet to contribute. Closing: excluding or controlling contributions from individuals who are not positive and may be destructive. Providing positive feedback on the ideas and feelings of others. Groups and teams Much like “managers” and “leaders”, the terms “group” and “team” are often used interchangeably. However, there are a number of key differences between the two. Teams and teamworking arguably represent the best and most effective form of group interaction and work. The idea and spirit of teams has become a major element of organisational management and development. All organisations have groups of people that work together, but a team implies things like mutual understanding, trust, mutual support, shared objectives and empowerment. Groups Teams Individuals are more independent of each other in nature and what they do Individuals are more mutually interdependent and supportive of each other Overall control of groups has to be imposed by a leader Stronger sense of the team controlling themselves, more co-operative working Formal organisation and “rules” are necessary to undertake tasks In some respects, a less formal organisation and less externally imposed rules are in evidence More inclined to be change resistant: stick to the rules More inclined to be change tolerant: happy to try something different if it works better Trust in rules Trust in and support of fellow team members A focus on the ends/goals A focus on means (the how) as well as goals/ends; more tactically adept The box above shows some distinctions of what might be considered a “group” as opposed to a “team”. For the most part however, good teams and teamworking are more often the result of appropriate selection and positive team building policies and activities. The next instalment of this topic will therefore focus on the development of teams and the different roles and attributes that might be required of individual team members, including that of leadership. Typical problems of university-based group work Not meeting earlier or regularly enough when work is set to agree behaviours, actions and deadlines. Overly relying on online, rather than face-to-face meetings. Not selecting clearly defined individual task responsibilities and commitments. Not keeping minutes of meetings, or worse still, making them up. Not peer checking each other’s work before submission. Not reflecting thoroughly and honestly on how the group worked through the preparation and completion of a given task. Groups where some individuals don’t: turn up to scheduled meetings (or apologise for failing to do so); respond to WhatsApp messages or e-mails; do what is asked of them; contribute their part to the standard expected (or, worse still, think it was good enough); and/or meet the timescales expected of them as agreed by the group as a whole, leaving little or no time to pull the work together and edit it properly. But remember: some individuals may be struggling with issues affecting their ability to sufficiently commit, so don’t judge too quickly. Reach out and try and help out if you can (again, see the RICS competency). Paul Collins is Mainly for Students editor and a lecturer at Nottingham Trent University Image © Hudson Hintze/Unsplash