Does high cohesiveness in a group lead to higher productivity?

Vecchio (2006: 212) defines a group as “two or more people who interact with each other, share certain common beliefs, and view themselves as being members of a group”. The term cohesiveness is the need and desire of individuals to “remain in the group” (p. 225). Oxform Brookes University (2006) defines cohesiveness as a measure of the “attraction of the group to its members” and “the resistance to leaving it” (ibid). There are two types of groups, formal and informal. Formal groups are those commonly found in organisations or professional sports teams consisting of an official leader. Informal groups are those that form out of friendship or chance meetings and seldom have leaders (Fraizer 2006).

So does high cohesiveness in a group lead to higher group Productivity? There are always two views to any story as the old saying goes, and this one is the same. The success of any group is very dependant on many internal and external factors. Factors such as; “group size” (Vecchio 2006: 218), group dynamics, “personality traits” (p. 28) and group goals to name a few. The group objective or goal is probably the most important factor for any group whether it is formal or informal. Like minded people As illustrated by Blanchard and Bowles (1998) in their book Gung Ho, sharing a common belief between two or more individuals, often forms a close bond as that of Andy Longclaw and Peggy Sinclair’s.

These bonds take time to form and strengthen as each member learns about the “personality traits” (Vecchio 2006: 28) of each member. Once formed, it becomes easier to relate to one another and it also becomes hard for an outsider to break this bond. Sporting teams such as rugby teams are a very good example of this bond. As Bayfield (2005) states, “rugby is much about brotherhood as it is about sport”. This is the mentality of these teams and most evident in that of the New Zealand “All Blacks” (NZRU 2003). The need for a common bond and a need for identity has resulted and expressed in the style of their game and the performance of a war dance at the beginning of all their games. The most famous of these war dances (haka) can be seen at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=503648905125177776 or the newest addition to their identity at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1263399859472240677. What makes a successful group? The All Blacks are “currently the number one ranked team in the world” (Wikipedia 2006) and the most successful rugby team in the world. They are successful due to diligence to their cause aided by team spirit and cohesiveness. They are successful because of sustaining factors such as “similar attitudes and goals” (Vecchio 2006: 225). The threat of losing to an external team increases their need to “stick together” and their desire to win.

This attitude is not restricted to the rugby field. According to various senior managers that one has conversed with over the years, the majority agree that successful organisations have successful senior management teams. According to this group, these senior management groups are productive due to the fact that they usually consist of between three and seven members - enough for everyone to have a say, hence the risk of anyone feeling lost in the system (Vecchio 2006) is greatly reduced. In addition, as pointed out by Robbins (2005: 254) “having an odd number of members eliminates the possibility of ties when votes are taken, hence a decision will always be made. Furthermore, Herek (2006) points out that there are two types of cohesion; social cohesion and task cohesion - both of which are core to success.

Again, based on these aforementioned conversations, it is evident that all members of these groups have common social traits and common goals which drive them to be more productive. But most importantly; there is one final ingredient in this mix which bring together the elements of success; a great leader was present in all the examples described in our conversations. According to Silbiger (2005), a leader is someone who has “self-confidence to make decisions, motivate others, assumes responsibility” (p. 387) and provides direction. How did the phrase "a camel is a horse designed by a committee" becomes so popular and ingrained in our culture? There are many factors that have a negative effect on any group or team. Lack of leadership and direction is usually the main reason contributing to failure. Without this leadership and direction, conflict may occur between group members which is outside of the “norm” (Vecchio 2006: 224) and seen by the rest of the group as “inappropriate conduct”. Where there is no elected or official leader, there may be a power struggle for authority and “status” (p. 223). During this process, smaller groups may form within the larger groups resulting in group dissatisfaction. However, a larger group consisting of a leader; may still have issues due to members getting lost in the system, where they may end up feeling as if they don’t have a say in the decision making process (Vecchio 2006). Furthermore, the formation of “informal groups” (p. 213) “often form as resistance to organisational goals”. Some groups may also fail due to “group think” whereby all members agree with an idea leaving no one to question an alternative approach or possible negative outcome. Without “critically appraising unusual, minority, or unpopular views” (Robins 2005: 257), a group may become less productive due to unforeseen factors not debated. As these negative activities continue within these groups whether large, small, formal or informal productivity will suffer as a result.

Conclusion

Productivity of any organisation is always dependant on the performance of its individuals and groups. Where leadership, direction and communication are evident, high productivity is most likely. However, where lack of clear leadership, direction and communication exists, the need to compensate will result in too many individuals stepping forward to take ownership or control. This usually results in conflict for power and status, ultimately resulting in too many people giving orders and not enough people doing the work, or as the old saying goes ‘too many Chiefs and not enough Indians’.

References

Bayfield, M. (2005) Martin Bayfield column [Online] Available from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/international/4668873.stm (Accessed 29 June 2006)

Blanchard, K., Bowles, S. (1998) Gung Ho! How to motivate people in any organization. London: Harper Collins Frazier, A. (2006) Managing People Seminar 3 [Online] Available from: Embanet MBASHR-060608-01 Sem 3 (Accessed: 21 June 2006)

Google (2006) Google Video. France vs. All Blacks – The haka 2004 [Online] Available from http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=503648905125177776 (Accessed 29 June 2006)

Google (2006) Google Video. All Blacks new haka [Online] Available from http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1263399859472240677 (Accessed 29 June 2006)

Herek, H,M. (2006) Unit Cohesion and the Military Mission [Online] Available from: http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/military_cohesion.html (Accessed 29June 2006)

NZRU. (2003) The official website of the New Zealand All Blacks rugby team and rugby union [Online] Available from: http://www.allblacks.com (Accessed 29 July 2006)

Oxform Brookes University. (2006) Characteristics of a group [Online] Available from: http://www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/small-group/sgt1.7.htm... (Accessed 29 June 2006)

Robbins, S.P. (2005) Organisational Behavior. 11th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc Vecchio, R. P. (2006) Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts. 6th de. Mason, OH: Thomas South-Western Wikipedia (2006) All Blacks [Online] Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Blacks (Accessed 29 June 2006)

Genuine Leadership - what makes a leader worth following?

Three forms of incentives - achievement, affiliation and power!

Creating a benefit package to help motivate the work force is always going to be a challenge for any organisation.  With so many different “personality traits” (Vecchio 2006: 28), it is essential that any scheme is tailored correctly for a particular individual.  The rewards and benefits must meet the expectations of the recipient in either one, a combination, or all three of these forms; “the need for achievement, the need for affiliation, and the need for power” (Vecchio 2006: 73).  Understanding how individuals learn certain habits and characteristics will enable us to interpret these needs into rewards which will help to increase performance whether “intrinsic” (Vecchio 2006: 92) or “extrinsic” (ibid).

As many organisations already have existing incentive schemes in place at organisational level, I will focus on creating incentive solutions aimed at individuals at three particular areas; Field Engineers, Customer Services and Executives.  This will introduce a “multi-level” (Ashworth Black 2005) scheme allowing individual and organisational goals to be linked; a method also suggested by Ashworth Black.

Incentive Solutions
To determine what motivates employees, it is important to understand how they feel towards their work, colleagues and organisation.  Without addressing the individual needs and goals of these employees, it will be very hard to motivate them.  Without motivation, productivity will be minimal and challenges will occur (Blanchard & Bowles 1998).  However, if these “satisfiers” (Vecchio 2006: 77) are addressed, then their reactions will be favourable, resulting in higher self esteem a sense of belonging and pride in their work and the organisations they work for. Ultimately, this will lead to improvement in productivity and an increase in profit for the organisation.  To be successful, we must align the individual’s goals with those of the organisation’s (Vecchio 2006).

Analysis of Field Engineers
Trusted and hard working, are some of the words used when a field engineer’s personality traits are voiced by many customers regardless of the industry.  Engineers tend to learn by observing how things are fixed rather than by being told how it’s done.  More often than not, most engineers will have been with their respective companies for a number of years - suggesting loyalty.  This group of individuals can also be classed as “self-rewarding” (Vecchio 2006: 54) in that an “intrinsic” (Vecchio 2006: 92) goal has been achieved by solving someone else’s problem.

Through informal conversations and meetings while on field visits with some of these engineers, one has noted their desire to be more involved and informed of their company’s position and strategy.  However, they have also expressed interest in monetary insensitive as another motivator which could serve “as a source of psychological reward” (Vecchio 2006: 78).  They have indicated that customers often ask for information on new products and services, but feel it is outside of their job descriptions.  Career progression was another area of interest which they felt was not being communicated or acknowledged as an option.  With this information, I would like to make the following recommendation for this group.

Suggested Field Engineer benefit package;

• Provide and allocate a quarterly training programme for engineers so that they are updated with new product information and fixes.
• With sales leads captured on most company’s Customer Relation Management (CRM) systems which engineers often also use for site visits, an opportunity can be entered against a customer while the engineer is on site.  If this opportunity results in a successful sale, then the engineer should receive a percentage of the sale – a finder’s fee.
• Once a “one-on-one” (Vecchio 2006: 96) session between the employee and manager has taken place and been agreed, a mentor or external training course should be planned and booked so that natural progression is achieved.
• A quarterly overview report of the company’s progress and strategy should be emailed to engineers – but also to all staff members.  This method of open communication is also encouraged by Blanchard and Bowles (1998).  However, certain company figures and strategy plans should not always be communicated to staff, hence this information must be agreed between the manager and line director.
• A report of all jobs closed by an engineer on a quarterly basis should be sent to each engineer and commended if goals were met or exceeded.  On the other hand, a report on the number of re-visits required should also be produced and discussed so that improvements can be made.
• Where offered - shares in the company once service has reached two years.  People always work harder when they know they own a piece of the company they work for - it also makes it personal.

Analysis of Customer Service
Customer Services teams tend to pride themselves in being able to satisfy a customer and is disheartened if the customer is unsatisfied.  Their reward appears to be more “intrinsic” (Vecchio 2006: 92) in nature.  But they too have aspirations and daily needs that must be catered to.  Following observations and conversations with members of this profession, the following is suggested.

Suggested Customer Service benefit package;

• Empower customer service agent and allow them to spend £xx to remedy a customer complaint (Vecchio 2006: 101).
• Reward the customer service agent who comes up with most creative remedy.
• Reward agent on timeliness of service follow-up calls to customer by use of voucher on quarterly basis.
• Provide with further training in area of interest for career advancement.
• Provide a mentor and allow agent to spend time in area of career advancement.
• Where offered - shares within the company once they have been employed for two years.

Analysis of Executives
The McClelland studies in Vecchio (2006: 73-74) stipulates that managers have different desires and needs depending on upbringing and role performed within an organisation.  The studies also point out that non-technical managers are more concerned with power than affiliations.  The “need for achievement was associated with career advancement, but only at lower-level positions, where individual contributions may be more important than the ability to influence others” (ibid).  On the other hand managers who have progressed from a technical background are perceived to be more concerned with affiliation rather than power.  This characteristic could be seen as a shortfall in that the fear of “disrupting social relations” (ibid) compromises their ability to make decisions.  For a manager to become a ‘true’ executive, a balance of affiliation and power to compliment the need for achievement needs to exist.  Therefore the following is suggested.
 
Suggested Executive benefit package;

• Provide leadership training to technical managers so that they make the transition from doer to influencer.
• Provide bonus to manager based on performance of their department, which is linked directly to the performance of the individuals within these departments.  The performance of company is therefore depended on the performance if each department.
• Provide further education such as MBA for those expressing interest.
• Conduct six monthly meetings with MD to discuss goal and values.
• Where offered - shares within the company which again makes it personal.

Conclusion
Although these suggestions have been made, it is imperative that the area managers for these groups take time to communicate with their staff.  Managers must exercise “Management by objective” (Vecchio 2006: 96) and involve the employee in a “one-on-one” (ibid) session to determine and agree goals and objectives (Vecchio 2006).

References

Ashworth Black (2005). Employee Bonus Scheme [Online] Available from http://www.ashworthblack.co.uk/bonusschemes.htm (Accessed: 19th June 2006)

Blanchard, K., Bowles, S. (1998) Gung Ho! How to motivate people in any organization. London: Harper Collins

Vecchio, R. P. (2006) Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts. 6th de. Mason, OH: Thomas South-Western

Using profit related pay to increase employee motivation and productivity

“Intrinsic” (Vecchio 2006: 92) rewards such as job satisfaction and “extrinsic” (ibid) or external rewards such as financial benefits are just two of the factors which motivate people. It motivates individuals, it motivates groups and it motivates whole organisations to get up each weekday morning to go to work. If these motivational factors did not exist, then there would not be a reason to do so. With this view or “perception” (Vecchio 2006) in mind, organisations are not only reinventing old methods but also thinking up new ways of motivating its work force.

Industry
Regardless of the type of business you are in, most organisations will typically have the following teams; Sales, Service, Finance, Customer Services, Technical Support, Training, Marketing, Product Management, Human Resources and Operations. With such a diverse work force, each team whether in the same department or function must operate in a way that gives the customer a perception that their query or issue is being dealt with rather than being passed from one person to the next. We have all been there haven’t we – to the point where we wonder whether these people work for the same company at all.

Motivation
Stephen Robbins (2005: 170) defines motivation as “the process that accounts for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort towards attaining a goal”. There are several motivational schemes and incentives that are used to encourage a work force to be more productive. Schemes such as yearly profit related pay bonuses; yearly incremental pay rises; career progression plans (goals) and commission based pay schemes. For the purpose of this article I will focus on the yearly bonus as a key motivator.

Analysis of the annual profit related pay bonus

Organisational Strategy
With a focused view on team effort, organisational strategy should be set in such a way that a “gain sharing” (Vecchio 2006: 94) or annual group profit related pay bonus; will be paid if the set goal is met at the end of each financial year. This message of “gain sharing” (ibid) portrays a strong message of 'we not me' teamwork throughout the company resulting in “more cooperation among group members” (Vecchio 2006: 93). A realistic enough goal should be set each year with the view that when met, all members of staff will be rewarded with a bonus. However, if the goal is not met, then no reward will be given. This is a good example of putting Hetzberg’s “Two Factor Theory” (Vecchio 2006: 77) into practice. This organisational goal is most likely accepted by members of staff; although they have no active part in setting this goal (Vecchio 2006: 96). Nonetheless, while in the process of setting this goal, it can be perceived by senior managers, that employees will agree. This perception is based on previous trends and achievements, yet the difficulty of the goal should be realistic enough to achieve, with an increase in performance expected (Vecchio 2006: 95).

The downside
As with all well-intentioned plans, there are always areas, which must be taken into consideration. With a motivational scheme such as this, management need to be aware that employees have different “personality traits” (Vecchio 2006: 39). Some will increase effort and productivity with the knowledge that a annual profit related pay bonus is only assured if the agreed goal is met. However there will be those who will not really be concerned and are happy to plod along as usual - or at least, this is the perception of others towards these plodders. These so called plodders are also aware that they will be rewarded as a result of someone else’s efforts (Vecchio 2006: 93). This lack of effort could potentially de-motivate those around them resulting in further organisational challenges.

Perception
My personal experience has confirmed that those in sales roles generally have the perception that they are putting in the most effort - almost bordering on arrogance. They perceive the situation as they see it; placing themselves at the heart of success and almost holding the company at ransom. This perception of ‘we make the sales, therefore we are the main contributors to meeting the projected budget’ needs to be eliminated. The use of a “pay for performance” (Vecchio 2006: 95) on an individual basis for sales team’s by way of commission, is more than likely to be a conflicting factor with a “pay for performance” (ibid) on a group and organisational basis, and may be a contributor to their perception. This could also be perceived by sales teams in general as a reward which belongs only to them.

Conclusion
Using profit related pay or as Vecchio calls it “gain sharing” (2006: 94) as a method of motivation; the individual, group, and organisational goal is met (Vecchio 2006: 93). The annual bonus is the norm within some company cultures and is perceived as a fair system (Vecchio 2006: 95). “Classical Conditioning” (Vecchio 2006: 53) of a workforce is achieved by associating meeting the yearly budget with a just reward. Further still, any new employee that joins the company will soon learn by “observation” that good work ethic and high productivity results in reward whether intrinsic (satisfaction) or extrinsic (monetary).

References

Robbins, S.P. (2005) Organisational Behavior. 11th ed. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc

Vecchio, R. P. (2006) Organizational Behavior: Core Concepts. 6th de. Mason, OH: Thomas South-Western