Often the group faces problems in which it is difficult to find an objective indicator of the correctness of the solution. Then the opinion of the majority turns out to be the only guideline of behavior for everyone. The situation becomes critical when a group member finds that his point of view contradicts the views of others. Then he has an internal conflict: “to believe himself or the opinions of other people.” The mere presence of other people is enough to change a person’s feelings, emotional states and behavior.
A group is often spoken of as an organism. One of the proofs of this is the readiness of group members to converge opinions and psychological qualities. As a result, the group can solve joint problems.
Often the group faces problems in which it is difficult to find an objective indicator of the correctness of the solution. Then the opinion of the majority turns out to be the only guideline of behavior for everyone. The situation becomes critical when a group member finds that his point of view contradicts the views of others. Then he has an internal conflict: “to believe himself or the opinions of other people.” The way out of this difficult situation depends on a number of circumstances, among which the main ones are the following:
- complexity of the task that has to be solved: increasing the complexity of the task leads to a decrease in self-confidence;
- experience in solving this type of problem: if there is a lot of experience, the task is solved easily, but if there is little experience, then difficulties arise with orientation in the task - focus on yourself or on other people?
- the authority of an individual in a given group: if it is high, then you can rely on your abilities, but if it is low, then the opinion of others may become preferable;
- the significance of the group for the person making the decision: if a person respects the opinion of the group, and he needs it, then the issue is resolved by agreeing with the opinion of the group; if the group is not significant, the choice is focused only on one’s own opinion.
Typically, differences of opinion at the beginning of group formation are greater than when the structure of relations is formed. To a large extent, the convergence of group members’ opinions is influenced by common tasks. In the minds of everyone, they create a willingness to agree rather than challenge the state of affairs. True, exceptions are possible if there is a struggle for leadership in the group. This struggle dictates its own rules of behavior to the group members. The struggle for leadership often divides the group into two, with each having its own leaders. This situation is called dual leadership. The emerging factions feed the egos of the leaders, and they complete the split of the group. In this case, a single task takes on two meanings - separate for each of the subgroups. Convergence of opinions becomes the most problematic in such a situation.
The basis for the change and convergence of opinions is the mechanism of imitation and suggestion. Academician V.M. Bekhterev believed that imitation and suggestion are often poorly understood by a person. People differ in the degree to which they are aware and critical when they have to change their own judgments. One, for example, is aware of the fact of contradictions and agrees with the opinion of the group or leader-manager, but then returns to his own judgment. Another, unaware of the effect of imitation and suggestion, is so susceptible to influence that he ceases to notice the replacement of his own judgment with someone else’s (group, leader). Researchers identify the following circumstances that determine the degree of compliance of group members:
- The maximum inspiring pressure on a group member is exerted by three people with a common opinion. Especially if these persons have authority.
- The influence of a group depends on a person's position in the group. Those least susceptible to suggestion are those who are weakly dependent on the group, but highly valued by it. Usually these people's abilities are greater than those of the rest of the group, which forces the majority to follow a highly valued leader. It is easier for the more capable to choose between the groups in which he has to function.
- The unity of opinions is stronger in groups with a democratic system of relations than in authoritarian groups, but there is more order and precision in the authoritarian type of groups. This happens because in groups with democratic relations, its members switch to interpersonal communication. If the situation is far from extreme or critical, then the effectiveness of joint activities decreases. The authoritarian system of relations turns out to be more effective in difficult, crisis situations. A more rigid distribution of roles and functions not only streamlines everyone’s behavior, but also increases the accuracy of solving management problems.
- Opinions expressed out loud have a greater influence than those received in writing. The exception is documents from higher authorities, which are of particular importance in authoritarian societies. Living witnesses are always more valuable, because papers can be destroyed.
- Compliance with group pressure depends on the order in which opinions are expressed. Group members who express their opinions earlier than others have a greater influence on the behavior of others. The unity of opinions of a large part of the group members has a stronger influence on the statements of the last speakers. To increase the inspiring effect, a leader or manager can express his opinion not only at the beginning, but also sum it up at the end, choosing the optimal line of behavior.
- Susceptibility to influence from others is significant if differences of opinion exist but are minor. Optimal is a certain degree of reliability of discrepancies, not reaching the point of absurdity.
- In cohesive groups, the pressure of a single opinion on individual members is stronger than in less cohesive groups. The established positive relationships bind group members with obligations to each other. In less cohesive groups, members have little to value other than their own opinions, so they experience less pressure from each other.
- With the threat of punishment, the effect of public consent and internal rejection most often occurs. Dissent, suppressed in every possible way by totalitarian regimes, leads to external unanimity, which ensures the self-preservation of group members and society as a whole. However, this external unanimity makes people indifferent, passive, and lacking initiative, which leads to a gradual decrease in labor efficiency with external well-being.
- The opinion developed by the group is more stable than the individual opinion of ordinary group members. Group opinion becomes the norm, a “role model.” It is no coincidence that legislation at the stage of completion and adoption requires mandatory discussion and voting.
- The first type of independent people is characterized by complete trust in their own intellectual abilities and life experience. Usually these are people of the older generation with high authority in the past, and even more so in the present.
- The second type of independent people is characterized by their withdrawal from group pressure while maintaining their own opinions. This behavior is possible in the presence of other significant groups and authorities.
- The third type of independent people is characterized by significant tension and doubt in the conditions of choice of decisions. But still, as a rule, they remain unconvinced.
- The first type of dependent people shows sufficient confidence in their intellectual abilities, but the reluctance to be rejected by the group forces them to accept other people's judgments. They can be considered prudent people.
- The second type of dependent people relatively easily accepts the point of view of the majority, because they have little confidence in their own intellectual capabilities.
- The third type of dependent people does not notice that their opinion is determined by the point of view of the majority.
Exposure to group influences depends on the type of professional activity. Technological specialists trust their own knowledge more, and the group’s opinion is less important to them. Humanists and especially social scientists are less confident in the reliability and truth of humanities knowledge and are more likely to change their judgment under conditions of group pressure.
A person’s compliance to group influences also depends on his psychological qualities. Persons with the following personal characteristics are more suggestible:
- anxious, emotionally unstable, dreamy and sophisticated
- having a type of temperament close to melancholic and slightly less often to choleric (stable sanguine and phlegmatic people react poorly to the opinions of others, even authoritative people);
- unsociable, responsible and loving order;
- having original creative thinking and good indicators of theoretical and practical intelligence, although this may seem paradoxical.
Civilized relations between entrepreneurs and managers should be based not on immediate benefits, but on the future. To do this, you need to find psychologically acceptable options for business relationships.
In social psychology, there are four main types of behavior of people in a small group.
Separating type. Individual orientation is well expressed. Optimal solution of problems is possible only in conditions of relative isolation from the group, independently.
Slave type. There is a pronounced tendency towards conformity, imitation, and voluntary submission. The optimal solution to a group problem is possible in contact with more confident and competent group members.
Leading type. The individual is focused on power in the group. Optimal solution of problems is possible under the condition of subordination of other group members.
Collaborative type. The individual constantly strives to solve problems jointly with others and follows the group in cases of reasonable decisions.
Knowledge of the types of behavior of group members helps the psychologist in the distribution of roles and contributes to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms of psychological incompatibility of individual group members.
The coincidence of the formal and informal leader in one person simplifies the situation; the discrepancy makes the group process more complex.
26. Group leadership
K. Levin et al. identify the following three styles of group leadership: authoritarian, democratic and permissive.
Authoritarian style. All types of client behavior in the group are determined by the leader. He gives tasks, encourages action, criticizes or encourages, explains, leads a discussion, etc. In this style, the psychologist is the most active and authoritarian participant in the group’s work.
Democratic style. The activities of the group are determined by the collective mind. The psychologist directs the group’s activities through discussion, group decision, and he himself takes the position of an active partner.
Permissive (anti-authoritarian) style. The psychologist is completely removed from the leadership of the group and takes the role of an observer or impartial commentator. In extreme cases, he only asks leading questions, but does not give advice or evaluate the course of events.
Specially conducted studies show that the optimal leadership style in a psychotherapeutic group is democratic (Rudestam, 1990). However, it is known that leadership style can change depending on the psychological climate and extraordinary situations that often arise in the group. In such cases, authoritarian leadership may be more effective than a laissez-faire attitude. There is a certain pattern: the more united the group, the less active and authoritarian the leader.
Personality of the leader. The personal qualities of the psychologist have a certain influence on the effectiveness of group leadership.
Slavson (1962) identifies the following basic qualities that, in his opinion, are necessary for a leader: balance, prudence, maturity, strength of self, high threshold for anxiety, sensitivity, intuition, empathy, rich imagination, determination, desire to help people, tolerance for frustration and uncertainty.
Rudestam (1990) considers specific leadership qualities to be: enthusiasm, the ability to convince and subjugate others, self-confidence and intelligence.
It is not just the sum of the values, views and beliefs inherent in each member of the group; the principle of addition does not apply here. Group psychology is characterized, rather, by the principle of multiplication, raising to the power of individual psychological categories, which gives group psychology, firstly, intensity, imperativeness, far superior to the influence of individual psychological influence, and, secondly, objective, i.e. not character dependent on the will of individual group members. Group norms appear to the individual as an objective factor in the form of predetermined evaluation criteria, stereotypes, and patterns of behavior.
A number of studies have noted that an important feature should be the formation of general norms for the group on which the individual depends, and the effect of these norms as factors of self-regulation of group behavior. In other words, the psychological dependence of an individual on a group is a motive for his acceptance of norms common to the entire group. This is a key moment in the process of socialization, that is, the process of assimilation and active reproduction by an individual of social experience, values, beliefs, and socially significant forms of behavior.
The main characteristics of the social environment are one way or another embodied in people. Socio-psychological structures of such social groups as a family, a production group, groups for joint leisure activities, an educational group, a military unit, groups connected by a commonality of living together, and other forms of direct interaction between people, in the case of the actual inclusion of an individual in the system of interpersonal relations in such groups determine the emergence of serious influence on the person concerned, influence aimed at ensuring the desired (from the point of view of a given social group) behavior.
Psychological structure of the group and the informal leader
The psychological structure of a group is a complex network of psychological relationships and interdependencies. The individual elements of such a structure are the individual positions occupied by each individual in the process of his self-affirmation in the group. This structure also includes separate small groups that unite individuals according to psychological characteristics.
Psychological structure is also expressed in certain types of relationships that arise between individuals in everyday communication. The psychological structure is derivative; its formation is determined by a number of objective and subjective factors. On the other hand, it itself is a factor that has a huge influence on the individual. Because of this, it requires consideration, study and intervention.
The psychological structure of informal groups is characterized by a number of important features. In the course of constant interaction between individuals, their relationships begin to be ranked according to the degree of their importance for group members, intragroup relationships acquire a structure based on the degree of preference shown to each other by members of such a group. In each group, those to whom the group members give the greatest preference inevitably stand out from their environment.
The member of the group towards whom the greatest number of preferences is shown becomes the leader of the social group. At the other pole of the group structure are those (or that) towards whom the least number of preferences are manifested (outcasts). This structure develops spontaneously, but, once formed, it begins to largely determine the behavior of its members. The role of the leader of a social group acquires fundamental importance.
The main characteristic of leadership is the ability to influence the beliefs and activities of group members. The leader of a social group is the one who initiates actions, gives orders, resolves disputes between its members and makes binding decisions on them. The leader approves or disapproves of the actions of group members, encourages or suppresses such actions. Members of a social group act, and often even think and feel, as the leader wishes, succumbing to his influence to a much greater extent than to the influence of any other member of the group.
The activities of formal groups become more effective if the informal groups that inevitably develop within their framework are focused on achieving the goals of their formal group, and the informal leader either supports the activities of the formal group leader or becomes the official leader himself. Antisocial, criminal groups are informal groups that develop spontaneously, and in these conditions the behavior, meaning, and role of their leader (“authority”) is of particular importance.
The psychological structure of a group serves as a powerful catalyst for individual behavior, but depending on the content of the corresponding group norms, it serves as a catalyst for socially useful or socially harmful forms of behavior. A social group can be characterized by two types of disadvantages. So, there may be defects in its external structure. A typical example of such a weakened social group is a family where one of the parents is absent. At the same time, there may be cases when the apparently normal structure of a social norm hides serious defects in the relationships of its members. Such shortcomings often do not correspond to those socially useful goals that determine the activities of a given social group, deprive relations in this group of their real content, and come into conflict with them.
Polarization of group affiliation
At the dawn of human history, within the first communities of people, an awareness of mutual belonging to each other, unity, i.e. the idea of “we” appeared (we are a tribe, we are a clan, we are a family, etc.). It is significant, however, that the idea of “we” arose only when a given community encountered another community and there was a need to separate itself from any “they”. Awareness of oneself as a group of people as a certain community occurs only through opposition given “one’s own” community, “another”, “alien” community or group. The very concept of “we” is possible only in connection with and in relation to the category “they”. “We” are not primarily “they.” Already after this there is an awareness and identification of the substantive characteristics inherent in this “we”.
The idea of the difference between “we” and “they” can either reflect an insignificant degree of substantiality, content, or intensify to the point of attributing a qualitative, essential property to such a difference, up to a complete, cardinal (polar) opposition between “us” and “them”, even to the conviction that there is a complete difference, an absolute incompatibility between “us” and “they”. This difference can be characterized by a certain degree of negativism towards “them” - from relatively neutral to negative and hostile. In the latter case, the categories of good and evil are polarized, and, as is clear, good is “we”, “ours”, and evil is “they”, “not ours”, “alien”. At the same time, “they” may be assigned the role of the source of those troubles and deprivations, the causes of which are unknown or unclear, or (which is very difficult to admit) “we” ourselves are the source of our troubles. In such a situation, the possibility arises, very often realized, of the emergence in the public consciousness of fictitious, unreal, imaginary, but sinister “they”, who are held responsible for all troubles. The imaginary “they,” winning their place in the public consciousness, gain strength and become a reality in the actions and aspirations of people, fulfilling their social function. This function consists in the substitution of fictitious “they” where there is a lack of real “they” for the formation of certain social communities and groups.
It is fundamentally important that the community “we” is formed by imitation of members of a given group to each other, as a result of the desire to be similar to one another. The concept of “they” is constructed by highlighting the traits attributed to “them,” and such traits are accordingly used to unite “us” by prohibiting us from being like “them.” The category “they” is needed to shape and strengthen “us” so that “we” do not act like “they”. Difference from those who are “not us” stimulates similarity “among us”; denial, a negative attitude towards “them” increases the assimilation among “us”.
Disorganization of social communities and groups
The dynamics of social processes (demographic, migration, urbanization, industrialization processes), as an undesirable result, can have a destructive impact on social groups and communities, leading to their partial disorganization.
The phenomena of disorganization are reflected both in the external (formal) structure of social communities and in their internal, substantive, functional characteristics. Thus, on the external side, the social processes of migration, urban development, industry, etc. lead to the disintegration of large families, to the impossibility of maintaining joint family residence of two or three generations, and the replacement of the traditional family with a nuclear family (husband, wife, child); in production groups - to a weakening of professional solidarity (collapse of guilds); in territorial ones - to the loss of social and ethnic homogeneity, the sense of territorial belonging, the increase in the number of migrants in the indigenous population, and the disruption of the natural balanced age-sex structure.
Disorganization of the functions of such communities is expressed in the weakening of group values, inconsistency of standards and patterns of behavior, weakening of the normative structure of the group, which, in turn, leads to an increase in deviations in the behavior of members of communities and social groups. Thus, for the 20 regions of Russia with the highest rate of migrant arrivals, there are 18 regions with the highest crime rate.
Disorganization leads to deviations in the behavior of its members in the following cases:
- participation of an individual in various social groups that impose on him conflicting systems of social values and patterns of behavior;
- participation of an individual in disorganized groups, which are characterized by uncertainty of social roles, social demands placed on the individual, lack of public control, and unclear criteria for assessing behavior.
This kind of phenomenon is associated with a weakening of the socio-psychological effect of community, which serves as a means of ensuring intra-group cohesion and mutual understanding, directed against tendencies leading to a breakdown in community.
Under these conditions, normal social groups are not always able to fulfill a number of their essential functions, i.e., provide the individual with a consistent, internally non-contradictory system of standards of behavior, a sense of solidarity and belonging to a community, and provide an orderly system of levels of social recognition and prestige. The degree of cohesion of people in social groups, the unity of their position is a value inversely proportional to the number of social deviations. If the degree of unity (integration) of a social group (class, society) increases, then the number of deviations in the behavior of members of this group decreases, and, conversely, an increase in the number of deviations in behavior is an indicator of the weakening of the integration of social groups.
Under these conditions, the ineffectiveness of the influence of the primary social group on the individual, the weakness of the process of his socialization (the inclusion of a person in the system of values and norms of behavior characteristic of society as a whole) leads to an increased influence on him of spontaneously emerging groups that oppose themselves to socially recognized values and norms that give to the individual a sense of belonging and group solidarity, but at the expense of his inclusion in antisocial, criminal activity. These are various criminal groups, groups of drug users, etc.
Any organization consists of groups of people. Such groups are not just a random collection of people, but, as a rule, a carefully selected group, trained and prepared to perform certain actions. Therefore, organizational behavior can be viewed from the perspective of group behavior, understood as the totality of actions of groups and the individuals that make them up. If individuals form groups and determine their goals, plans for achieving goals and the means necessary for this, then the groups as a whole, in turn, influence individuals, changing, modifying their behavior, interests and needs. A manager must know the psychological patterns of behavior of people in groups and use this knowledge to ensure the highest performance of the group.
Definition and classification of organizations and groups
Before we begin to consider group behavior, it is necessary to define the concepts of “organization” and “group”, as well as give their classifications.
Organization - is a group of two or more people, interacting and dependent on each other, united to achieve common goals. There are formal and informal organizations.
Formal organization is a group of people, structured in a certain way, and possessing special documents (for example, a charter, a certificate of registration), which indicate its goals and spell out its legal status. Such an organization is “registered” in accordance with current legislation. In a formal organization, the behavior of each member must be aimed at achieving common goals.
Informal organization - it is a group that, unlike a formal organization, has neither a specific structure nor a document certifying its existence. Most of these groups are usually formed in a work environment; they appear to satisfy some social needs, for example, communication or demonstration of personal professional achievements. Thus, three employees from different departments who always have lunch together and discuss various topics are an example of an informal organization.
The following classification of groups can be proposed: managed; targeted; by interest; friendly.
Managed and target groups belong to formal organizations, but interest groups and friendly groups are more likely examples of informal organizations.
Let's look at the characteristics of these groups.
Managed group consists of a manager and those subordinates who report directly to him for the work done. So, for example, the director of a school and the 12 teachers who teach there are a manageable group. The group of the senior railway auditor and his assistant belongs to the same group.
Target group also organizationally formalized, it represents an association of people who work together to achieve some common working goal. However, the target group unites not only the immediate hierarchical environment, it can also affect other relationships. So, for example, a specialist in the analytical department of a corporation, when a problem arises, can turn not only to colleagues or the head of the department, but also to a lawyer he knows who works in the corporation, an experienced supplier, the secretary of the head of the department and other persons who, in his opinion, can help help. In turn, he himself is ready to provide help and assistance to these people. The combination of all these people will constitute the target group. It should be noted that all control groups are also target groups; their members work to achieve specific goals.
Interest group is created when there are two or more people whose work interests coincide. So, for example, employees who want to change their vacation schedule are an interest group. Such a group would consist, for example, of people who want to support a fired colleague. Workers campaigning for better working conditions are again an association that has a common interest.
Friendly groups are formed based on the fact that people have one or more similar character traits. These associations often go beyond the boundaries of the organization; they can be formed on the basis of the same ethical principles that people have developed; they can unite workers of the same age or, for example, fans of a football club. Such groups can be formed from those whose political views coincide or unite people whose characters are somewhat similar.
Table 4. Reasons for people joining groups
|
Cause |
Explanation of the reason |
|
Safety |
By becoming a member of a group, each person reduces the likelihood of being “left alone”, he feels stronger, and doubts himself less. When people come together in groups, they are more successful in confronting problems that arise. |
|
A person who is a member of a group is respected and recognized |
|
|
Self-esteem |
The group will give each member a sense of self-respect. That is, a person is revered not only by those around him, but he himself is proud of his belonging to this group |
|
Explanation of the reason |
|
|
Meeting needs |
Any group is created in order to satisfy certain social needs. People tend to communicate with each other, so most groups satisfy the natural human need for interaction |
|
Often, what cannot be accomplished by an individual can be easily accomplished by the efforts of the entire group. In this case, strength lies in quantity. |
|
|
Achievements of goals |
Sometimes it is necessary to concentrate the efforts of several people to achieve a particular goal. There may be a need to combine skills, talent, and strength to successfully complete a work assignment. In this case, management should focus on creating formal groups |
Informal groups arise to meet the social needs of workers. People tend to communicate with each other, which is why employees often play golf together or drive home from work, have lunch together and drink tea together during breaks. It is important to remember that such groups, although not formal, have a great influence on the behavior of employees in the organization.
It is difficult to single out a single reason that would explain why people unite in such informal groups. Obviously, different groups provide different benefits to their members, which is why one person can often belong to several different informal associations. Typical reasons for people joining groups are shown in table. 4.
- Management psychology and ethics of business communication in a team.
- Group, mass, crowd.
- Formal and informal groups, open and closed, their characteristics. Reference group.
- Group device.
- Organizational behavior: role, mask.
- Structure of an informal group.
Since the psychology of business communication is an integral part of the complex of psychological sciences, it is based on the basic categories and principles developed by general psychology. Such basic categories general psychology are those that reflect
mental processes (cognition, emotions, will),
properties of the human psyche (ability, character, temperament),
· as well as manifestations of his consciousness (doubt, uncertainty, conviction, focus on certain actions, etc.).
The most important principles that guide general psychology and all its branches are the following:
1. the principle of causality, determinism, i.e. recognition of the relationship, 2. interdependence of mental phenomena both with other and with material phenomena;
3.systematic principle, i.e. interpretation of individual mental phenomena as elements of an integral mental organization;
4. the principle of development, recognition of transformation, changes in mental processes, their dynamics, transition from one level to another.
Social Psychology is an attempt to understand and explain how the thoughts, feelings and behavior of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined or perceived behavior of others. The problem of groups into which people are united in the course of their life activities is the most important issue in social psychology.
Social group- an association of people based on their participation in some activity, connected by a system of relations that are regulated by formal or informal social institutions. Signs of a social group:
1) presence of internal organization;
2) general (group) goal of the activity;
3) group forms of social control;
4) samples (models) of group activities;
5) intense group interactions
Definition of social group includes four main points:
- social interaction - that is, communicative interaction carried out using sign systems (“codes”);
- stigmatization - “pasting labels” by which we recognize membership in a group, formed into a social gestalt (an image in the mass consciousness) - the lifestyle of a given group;
- identification - identification by an individual of himself with a given group through the opposition “we - others” with the establishment of social boundaries and filters at “input-output”, as well as through the mechanism of social control;
- habitualization - that is, “habituation”, mastery by an individual of a given social position and the formation of attitudes and stereotypes inherent in this group.
Types of social groups:
Stand out large, medium and small social groups. IN big social groups (in addition to classes) include collections of people that exist on the scale of society as a whole: these are social strata, professional groups, ethnic communities (nations, nationalities), age groups (youth, pensioners), etc. Awareness of belonging to a social group and, accordingly, its interests as its own occur gradually, as organizations are formed that protect the interests of the group (for example, the struggle of workers for their rights and interests through workers’ organizations).
TO average social groups include production associations of enterprise workers, territorial communities (residents of the same village, city, district, etc.).
Toward the diverse small groups include groups such as family, friendly groups, and neighborhood communities. They are distinguished by the presence of interpersonal relationships and personal contacts with each other.
Any organization (large or small, commercial or non-profit, private or public) consists of many different groups that can be classified on various grounds:
According to the principle of formality:
a) formal;
b) informal;
To size:
b) triad;
c) small group;
d) large group;
By duration of existence:
a) temporary;
b) constant
By regularity and frequency of interaction:
a) primary;
b) secondary;
By degree of cohesion:
a) group;
b) team;
By leading activity:
a) educational;
b) sports;
c) family;
d) managerial;
e) production, etc.
Based on its existence:
a) nominal;
b) real.
With a general classification of large social groups, we can say that there is a special variety of them, which in the strict sense of the word cannot be called a “group”. These are short-term associations of a large number of individuals, often with very different interests, but nevertheless gathered together for a specific reason and demonstrating some kind of joint action. The members of such a temporary association are representatives of various large organized groups: classes, nations, professions, ages, etc. Such a “group” can be organized to a certain extent by someone, but more often it arises spontaneously, does not necessarily clearly understand its goals, but nevertheless can be very active. Such education cannot in any way be considered a “subject of joint activity,” but its importance cannot be underestimated either. In modern societies, political and social decisions often depend on the actions of such groups. Among spontaneous groups in the socio-psychological literature, they most often distinguish crowd, mass, public.
Crowd is formed on the street in response to a variety of events: a traffic accident, the capture of an offender, dissatisfaction with the actions of a government official or just a passing person. The duration of its existence is determined by the significance of the incident: the crowd of onlookers may disperse as soon as the element of entertainment is eliminated. In another case, especially when it is associated with an expression of dissatisfaction with some social phenomenon (they didn’t bring groceries to the store, refused to accept or give out money in the savings bank), the crowd can become more and more excited and move on to actions, for example, to move in the direction of some - institutions. At the same time, its emotional intensity can increase, giving rise to aggressive behavior of participants; elements of an organization can arise in the crowd if there is a person who can lead it. But even if such elements have arisen, they are very unstable: the crowd can easily sweep away the organization that has arisen. The elements remain the main background of crowd behavior, often leading to its aggressive forms.
Knowing the laws of the crowd can also bring significant practical benefits. Le Bon writes: “History teaches us that crowds are extremely conservative. Despite their outwardly revolutionary motives, they always return to what they destroyed.” A crowd is a temporary collection of equal, anonymous and similar people, in the depths of which the ideas and emotions of each tend to be expressed spontaneously. Crowds represent aggregations of people who come together outside and in spite of institutions on temporary grounds. In a word, crowds are asocial and asocially formed. They are the result of temporary or continuous decomposition of groups and classes. The main feature of crowds is the merging of individuals into a single mind and feeling, which obscures personal differences and reduces intellectual abilities. Everyone strives to be like the neighbor with whom he communicates. This accumulation, with its mass, carries him along with it, like the sea tide carries away pebbles. It makes no difference whatever the social class, education and culture of those involved. "WITH the very moment when people find themselves in a crowd, the ignoramus and the scientist become equally incapable of thinking.” The state of a person in a mass has always been compared to a twilight state. His consciousness, having lost activity, allows him to indulge in mystical ecstasy, visions, or, in a state of darkness, indulge in panic or obsession.
Weight usually described as a more stable formation with rather fuzzy boundaries. The mass may not necessarily act as a momentary formation, like a crowd; it can turn out to be much more organized when certain sections of the population quite consciously gather for the sake of some kind of action: a manifestation, demonstration, rally. In this case, the role of the organizers is higher: they are usually not nominated directly at the moment of the start of action, but are known in advance as the leaders of those organized groups whose representatives took part in this mass action. In the actions of the masses, therefore, both the final goals and tactics of behavior are more clear and thought out. At the same time, like a crowd, the mass is quite heterogeneous; various interests can also coexist or collide, so its existence can be unstable.
Public represents another form of a spontaneous group, although the element of spontaneity here is less pronounced than, for example, in a crowd. An audience is also a short-term gathering of people to spend time together in connection with some kind of spectacle - on the stands of a stadium, in a large auditorium, on a square in front of a speaker while listening to an important message. In more confined spaces, such as lecture halls, the public is often referred to as an auditorium. The public always gathers for a common and specific purpose, so it is more manageable, in particular, it more closely follows the norms adopted in the chosen type of organization of spectacles. But the public remains a mass gathering of people, and the laws of mass apply within it. Here, too, an incident is enough for the public to become uncontrollable. There are known dramatic cases that result from irrepressible passions, for example, football fans in stadiums, etc.
The term "group" can be interpreted in different ways, depending on the point of view. One of the most profound definitions states that if there is a group in an organization, then its members:
- 1) have motivation to join the group;
- 2) perceive the group as a single union of interaction;
- 3) participate to varying degrees in group processes (i.e., some people contribute more time and energy to the group than others);
- 4) reach agreements and identify disagreements through various forms of interaction.
Small group is a small association of people connected by direct interaction.
Most empirical research in social psychology has been conducted on small groups, and there are several reasons for this. Most of a person’s life takes place in small groups: in the family, gaming groups of peers, educational and work groups, neighbors, friendly and friendly communities. It is in small groups that personality is formed and its qualities are revealed, so personality cannot be studied outside the group. Through small groups, connections between the individual and society are realized: the group transforms the impact of society on the individual, the individual influences society more strongly if there is a group behind it. The status of social psychology as a science and its specificity are largely determined by the fact that a small group and the psychological phenomena that arise in it are the central features in defining its subject. Small groups throughout the history of social psychology have been the main object of empirical research, including laboratory experiments. Finally, the problems of the formation and development of small groups, group teaching methods, training and psychocorrectional influences, joint work activities and management of the activities of small groups are traditionally one of the main areas of application of the theory and methods of social psychology in practice.
First of all, let's look at the structure of the group (Fig. 1). (This scheme was proposed by E. Bern, the creator of a psychotherapeutic system called Transactional Analysis.) It has a large outer boundary. These are the walls of the classroom where classes are held, the premises where the clinic is located, a fence that does not allow outsiders to enter the factory or military unit.
1. Large outer border
2. Large internal border
3. Small internal boundaries
4. Manual
5. Subordinates
The small circle located in the large one is the large internal border. It separates the group's leadership from its members. Group members are not always a homogeneous mass. You can successfully manage directly no more than 9-12 people. A group, like a drop of mercury, begins to divide into smaller groups when it exceeds a certain size. Therefore, when the group begins to exceed the figure mentioned above, it is necessary to divide it so that the primary group has 7-9 people and is headed by a leader. Then a manager of a larger scale will have about 10 people subordinate to him. In this regard, the army is quite well organized. A platoon has 3-4 squads. Each department has 10 people. Thus, the platoon commander has 4-5 subordinates at his disposal: his deputy and squad commanders. Where are the other 3? These are the leaders of informal groups, which we will talk about a little later.
Groups are open and closed. Open groups are arranged in such a way that some members leave and others take their place. Not only group members change, but also leaders. Thus, production teams can be considered as open groups. Closed groups are formed simultaneously to perform a specific task. Once completed, the group ceases to exist.
And now about informal groups. If the manager does not know about their existence and does not know who the leader is, he will make a number of organizational mistakes. Trying to “reach every member of the team,” he can talk not with the leader of the informal group, but with its member. Then any of his requests, any orders will be carried out not directly, but after a conversation with the leader. And if contact with the leader is not established, either disobedience or distorted execution may occur.
Let me mention here one common myth about people's lack of discipline. People are very disciplined; there are simply very few leaders who know how to manage according to all the rules of science. The same thing happens in the group. The leader talks not with the leader of the informal group, but with its member. As a result, his orders are distorted by the leader's advice and prohibitions. Let us remember that the power of a leader is absolute, and the power of a leader is determined by official instructions.
When human reason takes over, the crowd scatters. In a crowd, a person acts not in accordance with his experience, but in accordance with the opinion of the majority or the leader.
The crowd is constantly in a state colored either black or pink, depending on the impulses received from the external environment. This explains their eternal changeability. One can observe an instant transition from the bloodiest ferocity to nobility and heroism in the highest sense. The crowd easily becomes either an executioner or a martyr. Why are there crowds now? Nowadays social ties are easily broken. Information is transmitted quickly, the rhythm of city life accelerates, and continuous migration of people destroys human communities. All this contributes to the creation of new ones, which are recreated in the form of fickle and growing crowds. The media, especially television, also contribute to such unity. By the way, through them it would be possible to organize and educate people. But you won't make much money from this. And smart people don’t flock into crowds and don’t make noise.
Informal groups arise due to the impossibility of solving any problem through individual efforts and the lack of direct interest in solving it by several members of the organization.
The power of united labor inevitably creates a community of interests. The collective interest of people is the result of the very fact that they have similar operations, similar professions or common interests. The superiority of group activity over individual activity does not occur when solving all problems. However, in a number of cases, collective action is most successful.
Recent studies conducted by P. Blau, W. Scott, M. Shaw showed that when comparing individual and group performance, the latter's performance was higher - social interaction provided a mechanism for correcting errors.
The superiority of groups over individuals is expressed in the following:
· during social interaction, ineffective proposals are eliminated, which serves as a mechanism for correcting errors;
· the social support provided in social interaction facilitates thinking;
· the presence of competition between group members for respect mobilizes their energy to make a greater contribution to solving problems.
Informal group activity is also expressed in the formation of creative groups along with individual creativity. This form of self-organization exhibits rationalization and invention. Therefore, within the framework of an informal organization, social and creative needs can also be satisfied, promoting personal self-realization, prestige and recognition.
The interaction between a person and a group is always two-way: a person, through his work and actions, contributes to solving group problems, but the group also has a great influence on the person, helping him satisfy his needs for security, love, respect, self-expression, personality formation, elimination of anxiety, etc. .P.
It has been noted that in groups with good relationships, with an active intra-group life, people have better health and better morality, they are better protected from external influences and work more successfully than people who are in an isolated state or in “sick” groups affected by insoluble conflicts and instability. The group protects the individual, supports him and teaches him both the ability to perform tasks and the norms and rules of behavior in the group.
But the group not only helps a person survive and improve his professional qualities. It changes his behavior, making a person often significantly different from what he was when he was outside the group. These influences of a group on a person have many manifestations. Let us point out some significant changes in human behavior that occur under the influence of a group.
Firstly, under social influence, changes occur in such human characteristics as perception, motivation, sphere of attention, evaluation system, etc. A person expands his sphere of attention and evaluation system by paying closer attention to the interests of other group members. His life becomes dependent on the actions of his colleagues, and this significantly changes his view of himself, his place in the environment and those around him.
Secondly, in a group a person receives a certain relative “weight”. The group not only distributes tasks and roles, but also determines the relative position of everyone. Group members can do exactly the same work, but have different “weights” in the group. And this will be an additional essential characteristic for the individual, which he did not possess and could not possess while outside the group. For many group members, this characteristic may be no less important than their formal position.
Third, the group helps the individual gain a new vision of his or her self. A person begins to identify himself with the group, and this leads to significant changes in his worldview, in his understanding of his place in the world and his purpose.
Fourthly, being in a group, participating in discussions and developing solutions, a person can also come up with suggestions and ideas that he would never have come up with if he were thinking about the problem alone. The effect of a “brain attack” on a person significantly increases a person’s creative potential.
Fifthly, it is noted that in a group a person is much more inclined to take risks than in a situation where he acts alone. In some cases, this feature of changing human behavior is the source of more effective and active behavior of people in a group environment than if they acted alone.
It is wrong to think that a group changes a person the way it wants.
Often a person resists many influences from a group for a long time, he perceives many influences only partially, and he denies some completely. The processes of adaptation of a person to a group and adjustment of a group to a person are ambiguous, complex and often quite lengthy. By entering a group, interacting with the group environment, a person not only changes himself, but also influences the group and its other members.
While interacting with a group, a person tries to influence it in various ways, to make changes in its functioning so that it is acceptable to him, convenient for him and allows him to cope with his responsibilities. Naturally, both the form of influence and the degree of a person’s influence on a group significantly depend on both his personal characteristics, his ability to influence, and the characteristics of the group. A person usually expresses his attitude towards a group in terms of what he considers most important to himself. Moreover, his reasoning always depends on the position he occupies in the group, on the role he performs, on the task assigned to him and, accordingly, on what goals and interests he personally pursues.
The interaction of a person with a group can be either in the nature of cooperation, or merger, or conflict. Each form of interaction can have its own degree of manifestation. That is, for example, we can talk about a hidden conflict, a weak conflict, or an insoluble conflict.
In the case of cooperation, a trusting and benevolent relationship is established between the group member and the group. A person views the goals of the group as not contradicting his goals, he is ready to search for ways to improve interaction, positively, although with rethinking of his own positions, perceives the decisions of the group and is ready to search for ways to maintain relations with the group on a mutually beneficial basis.
When a person merges with a group, the establishment of such relations between the person and the rest of the group is observed, when each party views the other as an organically united component of the whole. A person builds his goals based on the goals of the group, largely subordinates his interests to its interests and identifies himself with the group. The group, in turn, also tries to look at the individual not as a performer of a certain role, but as a person completely devoted to it. In this case, the group takes care of the person, considering his problems and difficulties as their own, and tries to assist him in solving not only production problems, but also in solving his personal problems.
In the event of a conflict, there is a contrast between the interests of a person and a group and a struggle between them to resolve this contradiction in their favor. Conflicts can be generated by two groups of factors:
· organizational,
· emotional.
The first group of factors is associated with differences in views on goals, structure, relationships, distribution of roles in the group, etc. If the conflict is generated by these factors, then it is relatively easy to resolve. The second group of conflicts includes factors such as distrust of a person, a sense of threat, fear, envy, hatred, anger, etc.
Conflicts generated by these factors are difficult to completely eliminate.
Conflict between a group member and the group is incorrect to consider only as an unfavorable, negative state in the group. The assessment of a conflict fundamentally depends on what consequences it leads to for the individual and the group.
But very often conflict in relationships within a group is positive. This is because conflict can lead to beneficial consequences. First, conflict can increase motivation to achieve goals. It can evoke additional energy for action and bring the group out of a stable passive state. Secondly, conflict can lead to a better understanding of relationships and positions in the group, to members understanding their role and place in the group, to a clearer understanding of the tasks and nature of the group’s activities. Thirdly, conflict can play a creative role in finding new ways of functioning of the group, finding new approaches to solving group problems, generating new ideas and considerations regarding how to build relationships between group members, etc. Fourthly, conflict can lead to the manifestation of interpersonal relationships, to the identification of relationships between individual group members, which in turn can prevent possible negative aggravation of relations in the future.
Organizational behavior is a science that studies the behavior of people (individuals and groups) in organizations with the aim of practical use of the acquired knowledge to improve the efficiency of a person’s work activity. Organizational behavior manifests itself in the following forms, aspects, and phenomena:
- - attitudes, values, preferences, inclinations of individuals, formed in consciousness;
- - behavior of individuals in relation to physical objects in the event of unexpected information and social contacts;
- - behavior of groups, teams and other groups characterized by face-to-face communication;
- - behavior of organizational units, such as departments, divisions, firms or large concerns; - behavior of an interconnected group of organizations;
- - behavior of the company's internal and external environment, for example the evolution of technology, markets, competition, government regulation, etc.
A role is the behavior that a group expects from an individual in the process of performing social functions. During my lecture, I play the role of lecturer, and students play the role of listeners. What do students expect from me? Firstly, that I will tell them things that are new to them, secondly, that I will tell them in a fascinating and interesting way, and thirdly, that I will not offend them. If my behavior matches their expectations (expectations), they behave quietly, listen carefully and write down the most important things (these are my expectations). Otherwise, they impose sanctions on me, that is, they start reading, drawing, muttering, etc. At the same time, they do not correspond to my expectations. If they depend on me, I can reprimand them, but I still won’t force them to listen. I can just force them to sit quietly. Now it is clear why it is better to organize the work of a group so that the leader depends on his subordinates, the client on the customer, the doctor on the patient, the teacher on the student, and not vice versa, as, unfortunately, often happens with us. After all, if students could freely leave me, I would have no other choice but to learn to lecture well.
If I sincerely play my role, then by my performance one can judge what kind of person I am, what my abilities, temperament, and worldview are. But sometimes the role becomes so automated that it ceases to reflect the personality as such. Then the individual simply changes one role to another, but there is no personality as such, or the role is separated from the personality; by the way a person plays his role, it is no longer possible to understand who he is as a person. The role essentially becomes mask(see below)
Let me give you a few examples. The teacher, playing the role of a teacher, behaves as a teacher should, from his point of view. He is often strict, unforgiving towards violators of discipline, reads all kinds of notations, and requires his students to systematically complete tasks. But then he himself became a student, that is, he went to the teacher training faculty. His behavior changes dramatically. Now he plays the role of a student. He is late for classes, talks during lectures, sometimes does not come at all. Where is his identity? After all, if he had sincerely played the role of a teacher, then, having become a student, he would have sympathized with his colleague and would not have disrupted classes.
I know that at the faculty of advanced training for doctors, the worst violators of discipline were the cadets of the “Organization of Health Care” cycle. But the contingent of this cycle is the chief doctors of hospitals and their deputies.
A mask is a behavior that an individual uses to communicate safely. We have a lot of masks, and we put them on automatically. A mask of joy at a wedding, a mask of sorrow at a funeral, a mask of good manners at dinner parties. Sometimes the mask grows so close to a person that we forget what he was like, and he himself does not know what his essence is. So, sometimes on the street you can immediately recognize a teacher, a military man, a doctor... A person even at home begins to behave as if at work. He's wearing a mask. Quite often you can’t “prick” it, but you can’t “stroke” it either! He's wearing a mask! I don’t urge you to throw off these masks right away. But it would be better not to keep them as individuals, but to use them as “capes of conventionality.” Otherwise, masks sometimes stick to a person so much that they become their essence.
Loading...
