To the third the norms, concerning informal social agreements. The rules regulating display of professional or group solidarity, admissible limits of sanctions to separate members of group, norm of group loyalty etc.
Here enter. The fourth type is formed by organizational norms. It can be requirements to clothes of the workers, shown for maintenance of certain image of firm, or standards at negotiating etc. Existence of norms is dictated by a problem of achievement of the purposes of group. Association of efforts of members of group demands some compulsion. Necessity of such compulsion is shown the more strongly, than the requirement for uniformity of behaviour is more sharply felt at the decision of questions of joint activity of group. Value of norms is difficult for overestimating. First, they promote predictability of behaviour of members of groups, reduction of quantity of interpersonal problems and conflicts. Secondly, norms allow people to define the value of the group distinguishing it others, and on this basis to construct model of own behaviour. Thirdly, influence formation of unity of group unity. The unity concept has great value for understanding of a role of group in the organisation. This role can be either positive, or negative, all depends on that, the group purposes coincide with the purposes of the organisation or not. In the first case members of group cultivate the best business and moral qualities, are proud of an accessory to the collective. All it together promotes that arising problems dare efficiently, creatively, taking into account the general opinion.
In the second case on the first place in a group life intergroup conflicts act. Obshche-proizvodstvennye problems pale into insignificance. Unity of such group eventually collapses. However while it does not happen, the group makes negative impact on behaviour of all organisation. The manager should know how to operate processes which rally people in group, and depending on a unity orientation to apply those or other measures of influence. There are various techniques which allow to estimate quantitatively degree of unity and its orientation. One of them is offered R. S. Vajsmanom. Its essence consists in the following. The set from twenty personal qualities closely connected with business dialogue is given to members of collective. Among these qualities? The constancy, endurance, initiative, sociability, sense of duty, knowledge of the possibilities, persistence, loyalty to group norms, sincerity, etc. they should choose five qualities which, in their opinion, are necessary for productive work and which are cultivated in group From this set. Comparison of repetitions of separate qualities to a total sum of elections allows to deduce factor tsennostno-orientatsionnogo unities of group. Depending on this factor the manager can undertake actions or on unity strengthening, or on its destruction. German scientists V.Zigert and L.Lang make for this purpose following recommendations.
For unity strengthening:
1. Help group to test the general success;
2. Try to strengthen trust of members of group to each other and first of all to the leader;
3. Develop feeling of an accessory to group as sensation of a certain feature, strengthen this feeling, carrying out joint group actions, showing a more potential, new possibilities in the decision of the problems, opening in teamwork;
4. Take care of that the accessory to group delivered pleasure, answered motivation to an accessory, respect, self-esteem, prestige;
5. Support belief of group in a reality of the decision of tasks in view. For unity destruction:
1. In the form of drama show to group hopelessness of its activity;
2. Show to group impossibility of achievement of the purposes put by it;
3. Sow mistrust between people and first of all to the leader of group;
4. Form the dissenting subgroups, stimulate flight from group, encourage deserters, and is better. Transform into the deserter of the leader of group;
5. Make feeling of an accessory to group with feeling weariness, discontent;
6. Eliminate the leader by its moving on other place of work. To the manager can be useful and councils of the American scientists which recommend:
For unity strengthening:
1. To make group it is less;
2. To encourage the consent with the group purposes;
3. To stimulate competition to other groups;
4. To give out compensation to all group, instead of its separate members;
5. If it is necessary, to isolate group from negative influence of other workers. For unity destruction:
1. To make group it is more;
2. To disband group;
3. To give out compensations not to all group, and its separate members;
4. To encourage disagreement with group problems;
5. Not to isolate group. Also recommendations of domestic scientist N. Vlasovoj, which in the second volume of the three-volume edition at last are worthy. Also you will wake up the boss results 22 rules of management of group:
1. Estimate potential possibilities of people and distribute between them role positions in group;
2. Designate a place and value of each member of group in the decision of the general problem;
3. Put before group an overall aim, without having forgotten to convince everyone, what an overall aim. It and its personal purpose;
4. Distribute duties, responsibility, the rights, the power and means, having developed competent duty regulations and having balanced resources;
5. Discuss the first difficulties with orientation to revealing of their reasons;
6. Suggest group to qualify the activity constantly;
7. Stabilise, rally group, create a favorable climate, and then simulate crisis that people have learnt to resolve contradictions and conflicts (a problem demanding time, resources, confidence of approachibility of expected results and participation small, but the qualified group of psychology.
8. Develop collective decision-making. Authorship appropriate to group, however in group give due to everyone depending on its contribution;
9. Develop constant criteria of an assessment of works and follow them;
10. Conduct collective and public analysis of contradictions;
11. Support in group the main values: respect for everyone, an estimation under the contribution, orientation on positive in the person, publicity, democratic character, the account of specific features;
12. Open sense and the importance of work, a place and value of everyone in a common cause;
13. Decentralize the power and give full independence to all members of group (but do not forget about what it was told in item 4);
14. Encourage the initiative, exclude practice of search guilty. It is important to find the reasons and ways of elimination of errors;
15. Do not forget about constant improvement of professional skill and sensation of prospect for everyone;
16. All group problems resolve in common and publicly;
17. Give the constant information on achievements of everyone;
18. To all members of group grant the right freely to give any information, to express any opinions or doubts concerning any discussed question;
19. Appoint one member of group to a role the lawyer of a devil - the person who is protecting obviously wrong business or engaged pettifogging, discrepancies, doubtful positions, the errors, criticising made decisions from the various points of view. It helps to accept faster correct, for all comprehensible and comprehensively well-founded decision;
20. Listen to the various points of view and criticism also it is quiet, as well as that coincides with your point of view;
21. Separate efforts on generating of ideas from their estimation. At first collect all offers, and then discuss pluses and minuses of each of them.
Chapter 4. Potential of group and its productivity
Formation of potential of group is influenced by all its basic characteristics. But the special place among them is occupied with group norms. They are a core of all processes of group dynamics and directly are connected with productivity of potential both the group, and its each member and all organisation. The researches spent approximately at the same time by V. M. Bekhterev in Russia and E. Mejo in the USA, have allowed them to come to identical conclusions. It appears, it is easier to person to work, if the group which member it is, supports it and waits from it for good results. Efficiency of group considerably increases in that case at the expense of increase of individual productivity. Moreover, the group norm of productivity can increase several times if results of work of everyone influence success of the others and depend on their general success. E. Majo were explained by this phenomenon to what norms promote creation of atmosphere which not only defines behaviour of everyone who considers group the, but also strengthens display so-called effect when the general productivity in collective develops under the formula or 2+2 = 5, or 2+2 = 3. Positive or negative character of influence of this informal structure on productivity depends on variety of factors. J. D. Krasovsky divides them on two groups: the cores and variables. We them will name qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative concern:
1. Professional groups, indicators are interchangeability, complementarity;
2. The moral and psychological unity shown in norms of mutual aid;
3. Style of the leader J. D. Krasovsky includes in group of quantitative factors:
1. Group level of claims, that is mood of workers on achievement intermediate and end results;
2. Qualifying potential, sufficient for realisation of total and off-schedule indicators;
3. Requirements to an end result which defines group work;
4. An openness of assessments of works of group from outside the head, especially in situations of intergroup rivalry;
5. structure;
6. Intragroup interpersonal communications;
7. Time of existence of group;
8. Group norm of productivity.
Each of the listed factors in own way is shown at influence of informal structure of interpersonal relations on productivity of group depending on the positive or negative orientation. Thus the factor which will organise, focuses influence of all components, the group norm is. It is confirmed with F. Borodina's researches which have been spent by them on the basis of numerous situations. One of them is resulted in their book? Attention: the conflict in design office in information department there was a group of translators (5 persons). It worked well, exceeded norm. The head defined work total amount, and translators distributed it among themselves, helping each other. In the end of every week head held group meeting, estimated work of everyone and informed on work forthcoming week.
Meetings passed is live. Translators offered an additional material to discussion. But in group there was one translator who had no enough experience and qualifications that is why all to it helped when in it there was a necessity. It is it irritated a little, but it was grateful to all for the help. And here once at traditional meeting she has offered the big series of articles containing a material which was extremely necessary for design office for transfer. The head has suggested it to be accepted immediately to transfers of these articles, having postponed that it translated. It, without feeling sorry for forces and time, sat all the days long and evenings, working even in the days off. The first transfers have helped designers to promote essentially in workings out. Its transfers have appeared quality, the work volume was considerably exceeded by what was in group.
A management of design office and the head of department were very happy with its work and have highly appreciated the initiative. It began to work independently. In two months the relation to the translator from outside employees has sharply changed. The head of department could not understand that has occurred. It worked in a separate office but when came into a room to translators, saw that it sits with tear-stained eyes, and in a room the burdensome silence hangs. Inquiries gave nothing: she referred to personal circumstances, and the others shrugged shoulders. The true reason from the head hid, and he felt it. Then he has decided to talk to it. It was found out that translators at first did not approve its initiatives, and then hairdresses, cosmetics, clothes have started to exchange at its presence caustic remarks concerning appearance. Then on it have some times palmed off incorrect idioms translations. And then began accuse her of a careerism openly. But it worked still qualitatively and much, and the head calmed her that all will change for the better. However the situation developed to the worst.
Besides the total amount of transfers in group began to decrease. The group has started to behave in a pointed manner: at traditional weekly meetings all sat silently and waited for instructions from the head. It began to show them claims, has demanded to stop obstruction of initiatives, but has come across deaf spiteful silence. Then it has replaced the initiative translator in other room. Her have left alone, but the volume of transfers was still reduced, and then stabilised at lower level, than several months ago. The head criticised group and held up as an example the initiative of that working woman which they have rejected. Translators answered with resolute and amicable repulse, appealing to existing norms of transfer. - there are specifications, we on them and work. The group became uncontrollable. Then the head has achieved revision of awards for an overfulfillment of norms and for quality of transfers. The result has appeared unexpected: four translators have submitted a resignation.
After a while the head remained with one initiative translator. This situation opens intragroup relations from the different parties. It shows, first, that industrial groups are formed on the basis of the general for all members of norm of productivity and break up as a result of nonacceptance of this norm. Secondly, in such groups there are defining roles, statuses, at everyone the culture of behaviour, the requirements to members of group, the sanctions in relation to them, and especially to those who drops out of it, the claims to a management. The group together with the leader protects itself from encroachments on developed interpersonal relations. Thirdly, the group norm of productivity because in organizational management it is the weak spot becomes the basic weapon of struggle against a management. The group is ready to go on a victim for the sake of maintenance of the status, hoping besides to achieve and other advantages. If it does not occur, the group can go on extreme measures: entirely will leave. In the fourth, each head of group should build with workers of the relation how it is demanded by law of interpersonal business dialogue.
However it was considered by the head of department of the information. It has admitted variety of errors:
1. Has made administrative decisions, without reckoning with opinion of group;
2. Has answered a call of the initiative employee, but has looked through reaction of group to this call;
3. Opposed to its group and has not understood, as well as why business relations have regenerated in the interpersonal;
4. Has transplanted it in a separate room and has received the formal. The relation of translators to work: completely;
5. At last, has definitively destroyed all relations when has achieved revision of bonus system.
The conclusion
In the conclusion it is possible to draw some conclusions and to formulate ten restrictions which disturb to disclosing of potential of group and its productivity:
1. Unfitness of the head its inability on the personal qualities to rally employees, to inspire them on effective working methods.
2. Not qualified employees a typical lack imbalance of functions of the workers, an inadequate combination of professional and human qualities. For example, Vudkok and Frensis offer interesting enough distribution of office roles according to which in each working group should be idea men the directing, the planning, carrying out a role the deterrent and a little executors. The combination of roles depends on specificity of the collective, thus one worker can combine a little from the listed roles.
3. Not constructive climate. It is characterized by absence at a command of fidelity to problems, there is no high degree of mutual support in a combination to care of the blessing of each employee.
4. An illegibility of the purposes. The insufficient coordination of the personal and collective purposes, inability of a management and the personnel to the compromise. Authors underline necessity of periodic updating of objects in view, differently members of collective lose representation about prospects of the activity.
5. Low results of work. It is meant that the collective should no on reached, should show aggressiveness in achievement of the significant purposes that promotes a high self-estimation of employees, growth of personal professionalism.
6. An inefficiency of methods of work. Value of the correct organisation of gathering and granting of the information, acceptance of correct and timely decisions is underlined.