Groups vs Individuals Essay

Individuals will complete a task more efficiently and effectively than a sort. And preparation in gathering dynamics, whilst interesting, has no practical(a) value as a promoter of increasing the standard of assemblage performance (Mullins, 2007, p296). Essay This essay is going to figure the principal(prenominal) differences amidst the hunt down of case-by-cases and the subject field of a crowd. The perception of the author of the essay agnomen basically states that at that place be more benefits than drawbacks in the individual drill when comparison to the assort exit as well as that a discovern task rotter be completed more efficiently and effectively by an individual.The separate crash of the title discusses that there is no increase in pigeonholing performance even though training in group is more interesting and appealing. In order to examine these twain statements it is essential to consider e really effect that might prep are an impact on the work of both(prenominal) individuals and groups. What often comes to tidy sums mind when discussing the advantages and disadvantages of working in a group is that the more pot you develop the more ideas you invite and that the more people you have the high-velocity the given task is completed.This essay will reveal that it is non as simple as m each of us might think and that there are many complex elements of peoples demeanor that might have both positive and negative effect on the final task result. In what follows, well have a look at these factors and give reasons why should the work of individual be more effective than group work or why not. In this part of the essay we are going to have a look at how dissimilar individual differences affect individual behaviour in the workplace. Individuals in the organization search basketball team topics which are record, perception, learning and motivation at work.All these five psychological aspects are very closely cerebrate to for each one new(prenominal) and they help us to understand behaviour in general as well as in particular but excessively to give modal value the performance of work and the quality of working life. We have chosen to think on unmatchable of these five topics Personality. Firstly, it is required to comprehend what actually soulfulnessality is. Despite of the fact, (Bratton, 2007) that any universal definition of personality has not been sure yet, we define personality as a relatively resistant way of thinking, feeling and acting which characterizes a persons response to his or her environment.However, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) there are round properties, which restrict our definition of personality, that are both inactive and searchingive, depending on different situations and over time. In the case of stability, we are not interested in properties that are occasional and transient. For slip, changes in persons behaviour startd by the consumption of drugs or caus ed by some kind of illness are not considered as personality characteristics, unless they nonplus permanent. However, there is one serious issue and that is the fact that personalities appear to be flexible.For example, a manager who appears to be very loud and emotionless in the office could be a caring and supportive parent in family life. In the case of distinctiveness, we must feel that personality theory is related to properties that are unique to the individual and not to those that all or or so other people share. For example, a man may be competitive towards taxi drivers, friendly with waiters, loud at c erstwhilerts and terrified of spiders. But the affair is that he may share some of these dispositions with a friend who breeds spiders.We excessively must know that, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) the theory of personality relies on cardinal main propositions. One of them is that behaviour does not change frequently even though is has both stable and distinctive feature s. The other one is that it must be accepted they only way how to compare the distinctive properties is by comparing them to the properties of others. One of the many theories of personality is Eysencks three-factor dumbfound of personality. Hans J. Eysenck (1916-1997), a well-known(a) British psychologist born in Berlin, Germany, used factor analysis to climb up his theory of personality.His theory declares, (Bratton, 2007) that a normal personality can be understood in terms of three basic factors introversion ( a personality dimension that characterizes people who are territorial and solitary ) extroversion ( a personality dimension that characterizes people who are outgoing, sociable and voluble ), stability instability and self-control psychoticism. Introversion is the reverse of extroversion, stability is the opposite of instability and self-control is the opposite of psychoticism.Eysenck created a two dimensional model which he believed captured the most important a spects of persons personality ( get hold Figure 1. 0 ). pic Figure 1. 0 points out the effects of various combinations of the three dimensions and relates them to the four personality characters (Bratton, 2007) originated by the Greek physician Galen in the second century AD. The fact that the two basic dimensions intersect at right angles ( in the sense that they are independent ) should be noted. Therefore, when we know what level of extroversion personality has it does not show us how emotionally stable the personality is.The level of persons stability could be anywhere along the stability dimension. The other thing which the diagram reveals is that various combinations of the two primary basic dimensions make different personalities. For example, as we can see, an extroverted unstable person is touchy, restless and aggressive an extroverted stable person is sociable, outgoing and talkative. Eysencks theory puts in our mind that the type of personality might have a vast effect on an individual completing a given task.Therefore, a company should be very careful when hiring new employees. But on the other hand, hiring a suitable type of personality would bring a great forcefulness and efficiency into the companys performance. In this part of the essay we are going to examine some problems that might occur in the work group. When speaking of groups we must understand what actually a group is. A group could be people waiting at a double-decker stop for a bus, audience in a theatre, people sheltering in a shop doorway from the rain or members of a football team.However, only one of the mentioned groups can be regarded as a work group and that is the football team. It is very significant to recognize a distinction between mere aggregates of individuals and psychological group. Consequently, we must know what characteristics a group must meet to become one. Firstly, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) it is a minimum membership of two people. No official size has b een accepted, and different authors describe groups that range from two to thirty individuals. However, the more members a group has the more relations inwardly the group there are.This fact might have a considerable effect on the group performance whereas the bigger the group is the better level of communication is required and the more complex it is to operate the group effectively and successfully. Secondly, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) every single member of the group must be able to communicate with every other member. In case of not meeting this criterion there might be some very serious problems in completing a given task. For example, if there was a group of three members and one member would not communicate with one of the other two members, the efficiency of the group performance would be scarcely decreased.Thirdly, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) members must have a shared sense of collective identity. distributively member must be associated with the other members, not see him or herself as a individual working independently and at the similar time all members must believe themselves in order to distinct the group from other groups. Failing to meet this criterion might cause a very negative impact on completing a task. For example, if one group member do not believe in some of the other member it might cause a accent between the members or it might make the disbelieving member work independently and again decrease the efficiency of the group performance.Fourthly, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) members must have complementary goals. Each member of a group may have different goals which can be achieved only by membership of and association in the group. Fifthly, (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2004) a group must have a structure. every member of the group will have a different role, for example initiator, suggestion-provider, compromiser and etc. These roles melt to become fixed and indicate what members expect from each other. This criterion can be met onl y by following true norms or rules.We believe that this is the most fragile part of work groups. roughly people believe that rules are made to be broken and tend not to follow them. This can as well as the other criteria have a vast impact on the group performance. This part of the essay is going to be related to the statement that training in group dynamics, whilst interesting, has no practical value as a way of life of increasing the standard of group performance. First of all, we must gain noesis of the term group dynamics. Group dynamics (Bratton, 2007) is the study of human behaviour in groups.The nature of groups, group development and the interrelations between individuals and group, other groups and other elements of formal organizations are included in this study. We have four major factors (Bratton, 2007) that influence group dynamics, but be aware that these factors does not sweat to create a theory of group dynamics, nor these factors can be use to every type of gr oup. These four elements are group context, group structure, group processes and group outcomes. We will have a closer look at the group structure. The group structure has a crucial role in group dynamics.It influences the way members relate and interact with each other and it also enable us to explain individual behaviour within the group. Without any doubt all of us have at least once found ourselves in a group. We know that group members within a group are not equal, do not have the said(prenominal) knowledge, have different perceptions and have different skills and abilities. This is where the differentiation takes place and where companionable relations are formed. According to Bratton (2007, p. 303) the group structure is the stable intention of relationships among the differentiated elements in the group.Size of the group along other factors much(prenominal) as roles, status and leadership plays very important role in differentiation of a group. As we have mentioned earli er the more people you have in a group the more relationships there are and the more relationships there are the more likely a participation might occur. For example, a group of three has three relationships, a group of four has six relationships and a group of seven has however 21 relationships. A big problem that might occur in a group is when a group has numerous members coalitions might intervene which means that some members align themselves against other group members.