A Social Psychology

Group Coherence and Leadership Roles

A group’s coherence is determined by each member’s ability to perform his or her tasks effectively. Furthermore, group leadership is vital because it determines team functions and allows people to act within their capabilities to achieve the desired objectives (Dick, 2009).

Group Roles

According to different theories, there are numerous group roles, but each role relates to one of the three major roles of a team member, including task roles, relationship roles, and individual roles. Relationship roles are sometimes known as maintenance roles since they serve to keep a group together, particularly during difficult times (Burke, 2011). The task roles and the maintenance roles are positive functions that propagate the agenda of the group while the individual roles also known as blocking roles can hinder the progress of the group. The role carried out by each team member depends on the leadership type exhibited by the person in charge. Leadership techniques are also based on task and maintenance (McCleskey, 2014). Both the member roles and leadership roles influence one another. For instance, the leadership roles change as the group dynamics change. Similarly, the member roles change as the group grows from one stage to another and as the leadership style shifts. Several theories, including the contingency theory of leadership, the role theory, group dynamics, and Meredith Belbin team roles will be discussed in this paper in relation to the three categories of member roles and leadership.

Member Roles and Leadership

Member roles are part of the leadership process (Ladley, 2015). An individual who exhibits several member roles in the group automatically becomes the leader of the group. According to Belbin’s team roles, nine specific roles can be identified in every team. The roles are divided into maintenance and task roles to ensure balance within the team (Mostert, 2015). Task-oriented roles help the team to achieve the results within the set period while the maintenance roles ensure that the group remains intact throughout the process. Belbin’s category of member roles includes the shaper, the implementer, the team worker, the coordinator, the resource investigator, the finisher, the plant, the specialist, and the monitor (Mostert, 2015). Each role is important to the team, and a leader must identify key people with whom to work in the group.

Leadership and Group Dynamics

Leadership is not an individual thing; it is a group thing and must be shared with the rest of the members for effective results (Morgeson, DeRue & Karam, 2010). According to the contingency theory of leadership, a leader should make an informed decision of when to use task leadership roles and maintenance leadership roles. Fielder argues that when the situation of the group is highly unfavorable or favorable to the leader, then the task leadership roles should be used (Makhdom & Ghazali, 2015). On the other hand, the leader should exercise maintenance leadership roles when the situation is unfavorable to him. The task leadership roles seek to energize the group by seeking the opinion of the members, giving directions, and measuring performance. On the other hand, the maintenance leadership roles seek to promote group cohesion by relieving tension from within the group, encouraging members, building a good rapport, and resolving conflicts. Leadership is not static; it should change as the dynamics of the group change (McCleskey, 2014).

Role Theory and Group Membership

The roles of the group members depend on the personality of the individual and the environment in which the group operates. The role theory argues that behavior is predictable and that roles are based on the issues that one has to face and fulfill each day (Koenig & Eagly, 2014). Role pressure often occurs within the group causing people with the maintenance roles to compromise for the purposes of keeping the group peace. The maintenance or relationship roles within a team include the encouragers, the harmonizers, the compromiser, the gatekeeper, and the summarizer among other roles (Amanchukwu, Stanley & Olulube, 2015). The encourager accepts all the contribution from the group members and praise people for their participation. The harmonizer mediates the conflicts within the team (Sethuraman & Suresh, 2014). The gatekeeper ensures that all members participate in the decision-making process, and the compromiser often abandons his position for the sake of the group. The social setting of the group influences the actions of the group members (Burke, 2011). As such, they support the role theory assertion that roles are influenced by the surroundings.

Task Roles and Group Objectives

A group serves two main purposes, namely to complete a certain task and to keep the unity of the members. People who perform task roles within the group are the movers of the group agendas (Dziadosz, 2007). The initiator provides the group with new ideas and participates in the leadership roles by helping the leader to come up with effective guidelines for the group. The information seeker ensures that the ideas provided in the group have enough factual backing while the opinion seeker evaluates the values of the functions involved in everyday’s activities. The information giver and the opinion giver provide solutions or answers to the information seeker and opinion seeker thus ensuring the effective progress of the group (Chong, 2007). Each member role is important in the group, and the lack of one can slow down the group’s objectives. The coordinator pulls the discussed ideas together, the elaborator expounds on different matters raised by the team, the energizer stimulates the group to greatness, and the technician expedites the group’s movement by providing auxiliary services, and the recorder acts as the mind of the group (Dulin, 2007). A leader must identify all these member roles by analyzing the personality of the group members to avoid the negative effects brought about by unsatisfied group members (Sethuraman & Suresh, 2014).

Group Dynamics and Blocking Roles

Theories of Sigmund Freud, Kurt Lewin, and William Schultz among other theorists developed the group dynamics theory. The theory focuses on team cohesion. The environment, personal factors, and leadership factors have a considerable effect on the unity of a group. Group member roles arising from unmet personal needs, often referred to as blocking roles, can have a detrimental effect on the progress of the team. Suppressing individual needs results in frustration, and the frustration of individual members is expressed through various roles (Chong, 2007). The aggressor disapproves of what is being done, the blocker resists and opposes other people’s ideas without a reason, the self-confessor uses the group meetings to raise personal unrelated matters, and the dominator tries to establish authority over others in the group. A leader must ensure that personal needs are taken care of to avoid the emergence of blocking roles (Stathi, Husnu & Pendleton, 2017).

Role and Personality

Group member roles are closely linked to the personality of an individual. Certain people will definitely take certain roles within the group, but the environment and the leadership offered to the team can alter the normal functioning of an individual, giving rise to a new role for the member. In addition, some members perform more than one role in the team, depending on the group dynamics (Sevi, 2010). The initiator and the encourager help in the leadership responsibilities and enable the leader to meet the objectives of the team while still maintaining cohesion among the members.

References

Amanchukwu, R., Stanley, G. & Ololube, N. (2015). A Review of Leadership Theories, Principles and Styles and Their Relevance to Educational Management. Management, 5 (1), 6-14.

Burke, A. (2011). Group work: how to use groups effectively. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 11 (2), 87-95.

Chong, E. (2007). Role Balancing and Team Development: A Study of Team Role Characteristics Underlying High and Low Performing Teams. Institute of Behavioral and Applied Management, 202-217.

Dick, R. (2009). Group Membership Salience and Task Performance. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24 (7), 609 – 626.

Dulin, A. (2007). A Lesson on Social Role Theory: An Example of Human Behavior in the Social Environment Theory. Advances in Social Work, 8 (1), 104-112.

Dziadosz, G. (2007). Social Functioning: A Sociological Common Base for Social Work Practice. The Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 34 (4), 151-168.

Koenig, A. & Eagly, A. (2014). Evidence for the Social Role Theory of Stereotype Content: Observations of Groups’ Roles Shape Stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107 (3), 371-392

Ladley, D. (2015). The Impact of Individual versus Group Rewards on Work Group Performance and Cooperation: A Computational Social Science Approach. Journal of Business Research, 68 (11), 2412-2425.

Makhdom, H. & Ghazali, M. (2015). Towards A Substantive Theory Of Leadership, Negotiation And Decision Making Of Leaders. International Journal of Innovation and Business Strategy, 2 (1), 30-44.

McCleskey, J. (2014). Situational, Transformational, and Transactional Leadership and Leadership Development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5 (4), 117-130.

Morgeson, F., DeRue, D. & Karam, E. (2010). Leadership in Teams: A Functional Approach to Understanding Leadership Structure and Processes. Journal of Management, 36 (1), 5-39.

Mostert, N. (2015). Belbin-The Way Forward For Innovation Teams. Journal of Creativity and Business Innovation, 1 (1), 35-48.

Sethuraman, K. & Suresh, J. (2014). Effective Leadership. International Business Research, 7 (9), 165-172.

Sevi, S. (2010). Effects of organizational citizenship behavior on group performance: Results from an agent‐based simulation model. Journal of Modelling in Management, 5 (1), 25 – 37.

Stathi, S., Husnu, S. & Pendleton, S. (2017). Intergroup contact and contact norms as predictors of post conflict forgiveness. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 21 (1), 20-39