A group that I belonged to in terms of entitavity would be a group of individuals that I worked with at a Dentist office. The dentist office consisted of clericals, receptionists, billing clerks, dentists, hygienists, office manager, and orthodontists. (Entitavity) is a group of individuals that are perceived as a social group based on the combination of its features. Entitavity has 4 major features which are similarity, interaction, interdependence, and structure. (Similarity) all members of social groups must have something in common.
Example: Similar interests, beliefs, values, hobbies, etc. Similarity in a group is what draws people together to form groups. We all became close to one another to due working with one another every day, interests, values and so on. Although we did have the similar tasks that we are supposed to complete outside of work we had more in common than we thought so. (Interdependence) the extent to which the group members are mutually dependent upon each other to reach a goal. Interdependence group’s reports liking each other more cooperate, communicate more, and are more productive. Deutsch, 1949).
In order for the tasks to be completed we were depended on each other to do the work that was given to us. (Structure) the stable rules that define group roles, norms, and status. (Interaction) Communication and coordinated action among group members. There was (task interaction) the coordinated actions of group members that pertain to the group’s projects, tasks, and goals and (relationship interaction) the coordinated actions of group members that influence the nature and strength of the emotional and interpersonal bonds within a group.
Task interaction resulted when we would were our daily work that needed to complete. Relationship Interaction occurred when we interacted with one another when we would influence each other to work hard into finishing the work. When all of us quit we all kept in touch with one another and seeing each other very often. Due to working together at the Dentist office we realized that we had a lot more in common outside of work. We would go to the movies, out to eat, and walk around at the park. I would definitely say this is a result in high entitavity when we worked together.
We had common goals, wore the same uniforms, did the same work, and communicated with one another. Due to not working together anymore after quitting it resulted in high and low entitavity and living our separate lives, although we communicate with each other very often. The level of cohesion was high due to working together but low in social identity. We are emotionally attached to each other, but not that important part of our identities because we all have other parts of our identities that we belong to that are highly more important thus the ones that at work.
Due to working in the company for some time it caused all of us to become close to one another as a group, which results in Group Cohesion. (Group Cohesion) is the emotional attachments that group members have with the members of the group. Being part of a group helps with less anxiety, more communication, and greater group satisfaction and less attrition. Being part of a group really just makes things better. Everyone is different when it comes to performing better than the other. One of my co-workers always tries comparing herself to me saying I do the work faster than she does.
The following resulted in (social comparison) which is learning about our abilities and skills, the appropriateness, validity of our opinions, and our relative standing. For abilities and skills we seek out to individuals and groups who are similar to us on relevant attributes, or who are slightly better. Due to comparison between one another this resulted in (upward social comparison) comparisons with individuals who are more skilled or are better off. Working in a group that is very small it provides a better balance.
Due to being in a small group can be used to balance our desire to feel both unique and included as opposed if you are in a big group. Effects of the Group on Members: The dimensions of leadership focus on (task leadership) focuses on the group work and goals. The manager doesn’t focus on having interpersonal relations with the group but only focuses on promoting task completion, regulating behavior, monitoring communication, and reducing ambiguity. When the following tasks are being done the workers are considered to be a conformist follower. A (conformist follower) active and energized, but dependent on the leader for the direction.
In order to complete the following tasks it is due to the work that is given to us by our manager. Having three people in the group keeps us more active and energized when doing the work but still need to depend on the manager for direction. (Informational Power) based on ability to provide information and convince others. Due to having three of us in the group we try to convince one another that if we complete the following clients that we are given today that we won’t have as much to do the day after. We try to push one another even though some have the ability to do better than others.
Group Tasks and Performances: The clerical work consists of filing, providing new patients with paperwork to fill out, and verifying insurances of patients. The following tasks are being divided amongst three of the workers. Since the following tasks are being divided I would consider this to be (divisible tasks) because each of the following tasks are being broken down into subtasks and divided to different members. The type of output into completing the tasks is also (maximizing tasks) because it was based on how rapidly the group worked into completing the following task.
The (social combination) process is additive because it was based on the amount of work that is done altogether as whole. Each of the following workers had 10 clients that need to be processed due to being in a group I felt motivated to work faster and hard and processed 15 patients instead of 10 which resulted to be (process gain) because it’s something about the group dynamic that lead me to perform better. A study done by Marjorie Shaw (1932) compared group performance to individual performance on complex riddles. She looked at 4-person interacting groups compared to individuals working alone.
Example: Three wives and three husbands want to cross a river in a boat that carries only three at a time. Only the men can row, and no husband will allow his wife to be in the presence of another man unless he is also present. How can they cross the river? Marjorie Shaw (1932) found that groups were more likely to find the solution than individuals (60% of groups vs. 14% of individuals). Shaw concluded that groups are more effective than individuals. She also argued that there is a great resource for explaining of a group’s superior performance.
The following are: In a group you have n times greater chance of having a solver present. The larger the group, the more likely the group contains a solver. The larger the group, the greater success it is likely to have on disjunctive tasks. Due to having three people in a group is better than one individual doing all the work. Each one of us can help one another into completing the tasks that were given to us. There is one person that is better than the other but no matter how many clients we have to process a day we are able to achieve it because of number of people that are in our group.
There is that one person who is able to process more than others and that would be considered the best member of the group. Group Conflict and Resolution: (Intragroup conflict) disagreement or confrontation between members of the same group. Cooperator-strives to maximize joint outcomes, seeks win – win solutions to disagreements. Since the work is being divided into subtasks it is better because we don’t feel as overwhelmed when completing the tasks. We cooperate with one another to result into doing the work that was provided.
Since social loafing tends to happen in many places of work since we are a small group there wasn’t any social loafing that occurred. Each of us cooperate with one another into doing the work that way we don’t have more work the next day to complete. (Equality Norm) all group members, irrespective of their input should be given an equal share of the good. When the manager gives work to each of us she divides the work where we all get equal amount of work. There are times where I process more patients than some of them due to the ability to work faster and complete the following task.
Conflicts in the group could occur but I felt since we were such a small group that we didn’t really have any conflicts with one another. If there was any conflicts it was due to disagreeing on an issue which it was something that had to do with the tasks that each of us are working on. Due to that occurring it would result in (Substantive conflict) disagreements over issues that are relevant to the group’s recognized goals. If there were any conflicts to occur within the group I would definitely say that cooperating and communicating with another is something that can definitely help resolve the conflict.
