Formation of group behaviour in the organisations — страница 7

  • Просмотров 4128
  • Скачиваний 97
  • Размер файла 34

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