What does the index of team cohesion show. Determination of the group cohesion index
Group cohesion is a parameter that demonstrates the level of integration of a group or team of people. The coefficient of group cohesion in sociometry can be identified if a large amount of work is carried out to calculate the data in the sociometric matrix, and then the indicators of group cohesion and disunity are identified. But if you think that it is possible to calculate the group cohesion index only with the help of methods that are complex and time-consuming to process and interpret, then you are mistaken. It is much easier to do this with a technique consisting of only 5 questions, which we will consider and learn how to use next.
Seashore group cohesion
At the beginning of the last century, methods began to be actively developed in psychology to reveal the intra-collective climate, hidden disagreements, etc. to eliminate them in the future. It was found that the ability of each person to join the team is influenced by several groups of factors:
- environmental factors;
- personal factors;
- team factors;
- leadership factors.
Seashore's definition of group cohesion plays a huge role in already formed teams that cannot establish interpersonal relationships for a long time.
This technique not only allows to rally the team even more by identifying its “non-accustomed” members, but also, as a result, to increase the efficiency of its work and the overall level of profitability of the enterprise.
Diagnostics of group cohesion
So, before you 5 questions, each of which has several possible answers. Choose the most suitable one for you. Do not forget that during the survey you do not need to put points.
1. How would you rate your belonging to the group?
- I feel like a member of it, part of a team (5).
- participate in most activities (4).
- I participate in some activities and do not participate in others (3).
- I don't feel like I'm a member of a group (2).
- I live and exist separately from it (1).
- I don't know, find it difficult to answer (1).
2. Would you move to another group if the opportunity presented itself (without changing other conditions)?
- Yes, I would very much like to go (1).
- would rather move than stay (2).
- I don't see any difference (3).
- most likely would have remained in his group (4).
- I would really like to stay in my group (5).
- I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
3. What is the relationship between the members of your group?
- worse than in most classes (1).
- I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
4. What is your relationship with management?
- better than in most teams (3).
- about the same as in most groups (2).
- Don't know. (1)
5. What is the attitude towards business (study, etc.) in your team?
- better than in most teams (3).
- about the same as in most groups (2).
- worse than in most groups (1).
- don't know (1).
group cohesion- an extremely important parameter showing the degree of integration of the group, its cohesion into a single whole - can be determined not only by calculating the corresponding sociometric indices. It is much easier to do this using a methodology consisting of 5 multiple-choice questions for each. Responses are coded in points according to the values given in brackets (maximum: +19 points, minimum: -5). You do not need to enter scores during the survey.
- How would you rate your belonging to the group?
- I feel like a member of it, part of a team (5).
- Participate in most activities (4).
- I participate in some activities and do not participate in others (3).
- I don't feel like I'm a member of a group (2).
- I live and exist separately from it (1).
- I don't know, I find it difficult to answer (1).
- Would you move to another group if the opportunity presented itself (without changing other conditions)?
- Yes, I would very much like to go (1).
- Would rather move than stay (2).
- I don't see any difference (3).
- Most likely would have remained in his group (4).
- I would very much like to stay in my group (5).
- I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
- What is the relationship between the members of your group?
- Worse than in most classes (1).
- I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
- What is your relationship with management?
- Better than most bands (3).
- Approximately the same as in most teams (2).
- Don't know. (1)
- What is the attitude towards business (study, etc.) in your team?
- Better than most bands (3).
- Approximately the same as in most teams (2).
- Worse than in most teams (1).
- Don't know (1).
Levels of group cohesion
- 15.1 points and above - high;
- 11.6 - 15 points - above average;
- 7-11.5 - medium;
- 4 - 6.9 - below average;
- 4 and below - low.
Sources
- Determination of the Seashore Group Cohesion Index/ Fetiskin N.P., Kozlov V.V., Manuilov G.M. Socio-psychological diagnostics of personality development and small groups. - M., 2002. C.179-180.
Appointment and instructions. Group cohesion is extremely important
a parameter showing the degree of integration of the group, its cohesion into a single
integer, - can be determined not only by calculating the corresponding
sociometric indices. It is much easier to do this using the technique
consisting of 5 questions with several answers for each. Answers
are coded in points according to the values given in brackets (maximum
the sum is +19 points, the minimum is -5). You do not need to enter scores during the survey.
I. How would you rate your belonging to the group?
1) I feel like a member of it, part of a team (5).
2) Participate in most activities (4).
3) I participate in some activities and do not participate in others (3).
4) I don't feel like I'm a member of a group (2).
5) I live and exist separately from it (1).
6) I don’t know, I find it difficult to answer (1).
II. Would you move to another group if the opportunity presented itself (without
changes in other conditions)?
1) Yes, I would very much like to go (1).
2) Would rather move than stay (2).
3) I don't see any difference (3).
4) Most likely would have remained in his group (4).
5) I would very much like to stay in my group (5).
6) I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
III. What is the relationship between the members of your group?
3) Worse than in most classes (1).
4) I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
IV. What is your relationship with management?
1) Better than in most teams (3).
2) Approximately the same as in most teams (2).
3) Worse than in most teams (1).
4) I don't know. (1)
V. What is the attitude towards business (study, etc.) in your team?
1) Better than in most teams (3).
2) Approximately the same as in most teams (2).
3) Worse than in most teams (1). 4) I don't know (1).
Levels of group cohesion
15.1 points and above - high;
11.6 - 15 points - above average;
7-11.5 - medium;
4 - 6.9 - below average;
4 and below - low.
4.1.4. Studying group cohesion
Purpose - to determine the degree and nature of the value-oriented
unity (COE) of the studied team.
Instruction. Each researcher chooses from the proposed list the 5 most
important from his point of view personality traits necessary for successful
performing joint educational activities.
Questionnaire
1. Discipline 19. Demanding to
2. Knowledge 20. Criticality
3. Consciousness of public duty 21. Spiritual wealth
4. Wits 22. Ability to explain
5. Well-read 23. Honesty
6. Diligence 24.
Initiative
7. Ideological conviction 25. Mindfulness
8. Ability to control work 26. Sense of responsibility
9. Moral education 27. Principle
10. Self-criticism 28. Independence
11. Responsiveness 29. Sociability
12. Social activity 30. Discretion
13. Ability to work with a book 31. Modesty
14. Curiosity 32. Awareness
15. Ability to plan work 33. Fairness
16. Purposefulness 34. Originality
17. Collectivism 35. Confidence in
18. Diligence
Data processing
The results obtained (for each student) are summarized in a table of results
experiment.
Experiment results table
No. Full name personality traits
14 6 1112 13 18 20 24 25 26 29 30 1. Ivanov + + + + + 2. Sidorov + + +
3. Skachkov + + + + + 4. Sklyarov + + + + + 5. Ulanov +
6. Troshchenko + ++ + + * +7. Troshin + + + + + 8.
Stulov + + + + 9. Starchuk + + + + + 10 Umansky + + + + +
Sum of elections 9 19 7 2 1 4 2 6 1 5 1 2
The coefficient C is calculated, which characterizes the degree of value-orientation
student unity.
C = 1.4 p - N / 6 N, where N is the number of participants in the experiment; n is the sum of the choices,
per five personality traits that received the maximum number of choices.
If C > 0.5 (i.e. equal to or greater than 0.5), then the study group achieved
level of collectivism.
If C is in the range from 0.3 to 0.5, then the class, group are considered
as intermediate in terms of development.
If with< 0,3, то данная группа недостаточно развита как коллектив.
For our example:
C \u003d 1.4-36-10 / 6xYu \u003d 0.67
Conclusion: This group of students has reached the level of the team. And since in it
the most valuable personality traits are: discipline (1),
diligence (6), responsiveness (11), initiative (24), sense of responsibility
(26), it can be assumed that the students of this group are successful in their joint
educational activities are associated precisely with them, i.e. with a positive attitude
to learning and the nature of companionship.
The key to 35 personality traits
and their distribution by areas of activity:
1. Attitude towards learning: Discipline (1) Purposefulness (16)
Mindfulness (-25) - Diligence (18) Diligence (6)
2. General style of behavior and activity: Social activity (12) Consciousness
public duty (3) Integrity (27)
Ideological conviction (7) Moral education (9)
3. Qualities that characterize knowledge: Well-read (5) Awareness (32)
Curiosity (14) Knowledge (2)
Spiritual wealth (21)
4. Qualities of the mind: Originality (34) Wits (4) Initiative (24)
Judgment (30) Practicality (20)
5. Qualities that characterize educational and organizational skills: Skill
control work (8)
Ability to work with a book (15) Ability to explain a task (22) Ability to plan
job (13) sense of responsibility (26)
6. Attitude towards comrades: Sociability (29) Honesty (23) Justice (33)
Self-reliance (28) Self-confidence (35) Self-demanding (19)
7. Attitude towards oneself: Self-criticism (10) Modesty (31) Independence (28)
Self-confidence (35) Self-demanding (19)
4.1.5. Expert assessment of the cohesion of the study group
Appointment. The technique is designed to determine group cohesion
student groups and can be used by employees of educational
spheres in order to optimize the educational process.
Instruction. The methodology gives seven psychological characteristics of the class.
Tested teachers choose one of the three proposed statements (a, b, c),
which, in their opinion, best reflects the actual state of
the class being studied.
It is advisable to take this test at the beginning and at the end of the academic year for
obtaining comparative results. In determining the cohesion of a group (class)
2-3 teachers should be employed.
Assessed psychological characteristics of study groups or classes:
1. a) I think that all students are warm, cozy and comfortable in the classroom, they are in a circle
b) Not everyone feels the friendly support of the class.
c) There are lonely children in the class.
2. a) Basically, the guys value the class.
b) The majority of students do not think about the significance of the class in their
school life.
c) I think that there are some guys who would like to change the class.
3. a) It is felt that the class shows concern for each student.
b) The class goes beyond taking care of itself, the school,
shows concern for
large scale
c) It can be said that the class is more concerned about external affairs such as discos than
internal protection of each student.
4. a) Satisfaction with educational work in the classroom can be expressed.
b) I think that educational work in the classroom can be supplemented
some important points.
c) I believe that it requires a fundamental change.
5.a) You can positively evaluate the collective creative activities carried out in the class
b) Collective creative work should be put into practice more often.
c) The class does not need new collective creative activities.
6. a) I think that in the class there is a basis for common friendship,
b) They are mostly friends in groups, nothing in common.
c) Friendship of everyone in the class is impossible.
7.a) I think that most of the guys show their abilities and interests in
b) In the classroom, the opportunities for the manifestation of the abilities of the children are too limited.
c) There are many guys in the class whose abilities and interests have not yet been revealed.
Data processing and interpretation
1. The answers received are converted into points using the following table
Results evaluation table
No. of questions Answers in points
A B C i 10 2 -10 2 10 2 -10 3 10 20 -10 4 10 5 -10 5 20 10 -10 6 10 6 _5 7 30
20 -10 2. The overall total result in points is calculated. the greatest
the sum of points can be 100, the lowest - 65.
High level of group cohesion ~ 76-100 points (there is a cohesive
a team where among all the personality of each student is valued and respected,
students not only carry out active meaningful activities within the class,
but also have a positive impact on others).
The average level of group cohesion is 46 - 75 points (in the class
there is no unity of the collective, there are only separate groupings according to
sympathies, common interests, etc., the positive activity of students is limited
only within its own class).
Low level of group cohesion - 30-45 points (students are disunited,
there are only individual leaders who suppress the personalities of the rest, collective affairs
are carried out on a case-by-case basis and do not have a significant impact on both
students in this class, and on others).
The critical level of group cohesion is below 30 points (students
disorganized and almost unmanageable, there are no leaders among themselves, there are no
4.1.6. Definition of mediated
group cohesion
(V. S. Ivashkin, V. V. Onufrieva)
Appointment. This technique is designed to study the group
cohesion mediated by the goals and objectives of joint activities. IN
business, moral and emotional
qualities (3 x 7), reflecting the value orientations of youth groups.
Instruction. Choose from the list of 5 qualities that you
consider the most important for a person as a member of the team.
adherence to principles, activity, honesty, justice, and wrote them down in
questionnaire sheet.
Stimulus material with differentiation of qualities
diligence D friendliness
Integrity M Restraint E
Gaiety E Justice
Neatness D Sociability
Honesty M Activity
diligence D sincerity
Integrity M Perseverance
Organization D Charm
Responsiveness E Truthfulness
Friendliness E Businesslike
Modesty
Symbols: D - business qualities; M - moral qualities; E -
emotional qualities.
cohesion, COE, psychological climate:
1. The list of personality traits is written by the subjects under the dictation of the experimenter or
work on the poster posted on the board.
2. In the questionnaire, the subjects write down: a) 5 qualities selected according to the first
instructions; b) 5 qualities selected according to the second instruction; c) answers to questions
3. If possible, you can print the questionnaires, including in them
a list of qualities, the first instruction, a space to record the choices for the first
instructions, second instruction, space to record choices for the second instruction,
a list of three questions, a third instruction, grades a, b, c.
4. The results are processed after the subject has completed all three
instructions.
5. Before and during the experiment, no explanations about the tasks and content
studies are not reported to the subjects,
6. The technique can also be used to study production
teams. In this case, you need to change the wording of the questions in the section
"Psychological climate in the team", replacing the word "study" with "work".
Based on the results obtained, measures for psychological correction are outlined
one group or another.
a) The total number of selected qualities is calculated by multiplying the number
test subjects for 5.
b) Calculate the percentage of choices attributable to emotional, business and
moral qualities (D, M, E).
In our case:
D=30/60*100%=50%
M=20/60*100%=33%
E=10/60*100%=17%
1. 3 points - group cohesion is high and if D > 55% or D + M > 60%.
2. 2 points - group cohesion is average and if M< 55%.
3. In other cases, group cohesion is low, i.e. 35%< М < 55%
In our case, D + M = 50 + 33 = 83% - high cohesion, score 3 points.
4.1.7. Definition of value-oriented
group unity (COE)
(V. S. Ivashkin, V. V. Onufrieva)
Appointment. The technique is aimed at identifying COE based on group commonality
when choosing the most value-significant qualities from the incentive list.
Instruction. Choose from the proposed list of 5 qualities that are most valuable to you.
successful collaboration.
Let, for example, the subject chose the following qualities: industriousness,
organization, adherence to principles, activity, honesty and recorded in the questionnaire
sheet (stimulus material is the same).
Processing and interpretation of results
a) Calculate the number of choices (N) made by the subject.
b) Count the number of choices per quality.
c) Count the number of choices for the 5 most popular qualities.
d) Count the number of elections falling on the 5 most unpopular
qualities (M).
e) Calculate the coefficient of value-oriented unity (C) according to the formula.
In our case: С=35/50*100%=70%
Criteria for evaluation:
a) С> 50%, CFU high, score 3 points.
b) 30%< С< 50%, ЦОЕ среднее, оценка 2 балла.
c) in other cases - CFU is low, score 1 point. In our case, COE
high, score 3 points.
4.1.8. Expert diagnostics of interaction in small groups (A. S. Chernyshev, S.
V. Sarychev)
Instruction. In each box, circle one of the 7 manifestations
interactions characteristic of the study group.
Form of expert assessments
/. Hierarchy and variability of interaction
7. A high level of hierarchy and variability of interaction is manifested in accounting
by all members of the group of possible consequences from interaction changes, in
balancing the consequences of such changes with the likelihood of achieving a better
result.
6. The group is able to vary the interaction over a wide range, most
group members is focused on finding the best way to interact.
5. The group is able to deliberately change the interaction, adjust it in
process of joint activity. Participates in the implementation of changes
most of the group members.
4. The group expressed the desire to change the interaction in accordance with
terms of joint activity. But in most situations, group members
limited only by intentions to change the interaction.
3. Small
the number of members of the group, while the rest tend to preserve the usual way
interaction that has developed spontaneously
2. Changing the interaction according to the situation presents to the members
groups of considerable difficulty, requires extraordinary efforts and high costs
1. Changing the interaction for the group is almost impossible, the interaction
inadequate situation of joint activities, not streamlined.
//. Independence and initiative in interaction
1. All members of the group are ready to take the initiative themselves and take initiative
behavior aimed at making changes in the interaction of all other
group members
6. Initiative in interaction characterizes the majority of group members,
the group is ready to show and take the initiative.
5. Independence and initiative in interaction are characteristic of
a small number of group members, the group is focused on taking initiative
behavior of this narrow circle of people.
4. Initiatives in interaction come from one of the members of the group.
3. Members of the group are aware of the need to take the initiative and
autonomy in terms of making changes to the interaction, but activity in
do not show this attitude. Use mostly conventional methods
interactions.
2. Initiatives to change interactions are brought into the group
from the outside. Group members are not independent in interaction.
1. The interaction of group members is motivated only by external in relation to
group of circumstances. Members of the group are not ready to take the initiative from outside.
///. Engagement in interaction
1. Full involvement of all members of the group in the interaction, implying
awareness of one's own position in interaction, awareness of the positions of others
members of the group, correlation with this behavior and actions.
6. Full involvement in the interaction of most members of the group, the rest
group members are not fully included.
5. Most of the members of the group are not fully included in the interaction, full
inclusion of a small number of members of the group (minority).
4. Incomplete involvement in the interaction of all members of the group, they are addressed to
themselves and their place in interaction. Disunity in interaction.
3. Most of the members of the group are not fully included in the interaction, part
group members - "not included".
2. Non-involvement in the interaction of the majority of group members and incomplete
the inclusion of other members of the group lead to the manifestation of rivalry in
interaction.
1. Group members are not included in the interaction, each of them seeks to take
leading position in interaction. Rivalry leads to the breakdown of interaction
by type of conflict.
Processing and interpretation of results
The circled measures of group interaction are
quantitative and qualitative criterion of integral and partial
interactions in the study group. At the same time, indicators 5-7 characterize
growing positive trends in group interactions. Indicators, in
descending order from 3 to 1, indicate the progression of negative
trends in group interactions. Indicator 4 is intermediate,
average group interaction. Thus, each
substructure of group interaction includes seven criteria, of which three
have a positive sign (5-7) and three negative (3-1), and an intermediate one (4) -
neutral, that is, each substructure is evaluated on a 7-point bipolar
To generalize expert assessments, you must first summarize the individual
indicators, and then determine the average result.
It can be assumed that a high level of group interaction, both at the level
each of the substructures, and at the integrative level will correspond
indicators of 5.5 - 7 points, the average level - 3.6 - 5.5 points; about the predominance
unfavorable tendencies in group interaction can be judged by
indicators from 3.5 to 2.6 points; the extreme level of unfavorability in the group
interaction correspond to indicators from 2.5 to 1 point.
At the final stage of the analysis of the obtained data, a comparative
analysis of group interaction for all studied substructures.
4.1.9. Expert diagnostics
Interactive Consistency in Small Groups
(A. S. Chernyshov, S. V. Sarychev)
Instruction. Read the specifics of group consistency given in
three blocks of the form of expert assessments: I - availability and quality of the plan; II -
coordination and distribution of functions; III - matching joint
activity plan. Then, in each block, circle one of the seven
manifestations of consistency, characteristic of the study group.
Form of expert assessments
/. Availability and quality of the plan
7. "Conceptual" vision of the forthcoming joint activity. All members
groups seek to find a rational version of the plan for joint activities,
carefully discuss all the details, reach the level of "scenario".
6. Group members strive to develop a plan, discuss the upcoming joint
activity at the level of fragments of the "scenario", including the main content
upcoming activity.
5. A clearly expressed desire to develop a plan is realized in the development
the main directions of the upcoming joint activities, the plan does not contain
essential details of future activities.
4. When developing a plan for joint activities, the group focuses on
creation of new combinations from among the developments available to the group, standard
blanks.
3. The group develops a plan for joint activities using templates
workpieces without adapting or correcting them in accordance with the conditions
joint activities.
2. Realizing the need for a plan, group members do not seek to create
1. The Group carries out joint activities without planning, activities
develops spontaneously.
//. Consistency and distribution of functions
7. Consistency of the functions performed by all members of the group, everyone knows their own
functions and functions of other members of the group (what they consist of and how they are carried out).
6. With a clearly expressed desire of group members to harmonize functions
most members of the group are focused on their functions, their content and
implementation.
5. When distributing and coordinating functions, group members emphasize
distribution of functions; clearly shows the interest of each member of the group to
to its functions.
4. Coordination of functions occurs spontaneously, group members do not agree on
their distribution, as a result of which some functions are duplicated.
3. Discrepancies between group members in the process of distribution and reconciliation
functions and in the process of their implementation.
2. Conscious of the need to distribute and harmonize functions, all members
groups don't try to put it into practice.
1. Functions are not coordinated, for a number of group members they are duplicated, for others
are mutually exclusive.
///. Compliance of joint activities with the plan
7. The Group is fully implementing its own plan for the upcoming joint
activities, In carrying out the plan, the group operates flexibly and in accordance with
situation.
6. In the process of joint activities, the group slightly changes the plan,
modifies individual details of the plan.
5. The group follows the plan of joint activities in general terms, changing
4. The actions of individual members of the group do not correspond to the plan, its main
3. The actions of the majority of the members of the group are not provided for by the plan of the joint
activities, are formed spontaneously, in the course of the implementation of activities.
2. The actions of all members of the group do not correspond to the plan, are not provided for by the plan.
1. Due to spontaneous, unplanned actions of group members
joint activity is disorganized and disintegrates.
Processing and interpretation of results
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the obtained results is carried out
similar to the scheme described in the expert assessment of group interaction.
DIAGNOSTICS
PSYCHOLOGICAL CLIMATE IN SMALL GROUPS
4.2.1. Methodology for assessing the psychological atmosphere in a team (according to A.F.
Appointment. The technique is used to assess the psychological atmosphere in
team. It is based on the method of semantic differential. Methodology
is interesting in that it allows anonymous examination, and this increases its
reliability. Reliability increases when combined with other techniques (for example,
sociometry).
Instruction. The proposed table shows pairs that are opposite in meaning
words with which you can describe the atmosphere in your group, team. How
closer to the right or left word in each pair you put the * sign, especially
this sign is expressed in your team.
1 2 g 4 5 6 7 8 1 . Friendliness Hostility 2. Consent
Disagreement 3, Satisfaction Dissatisfaction 4. Productivity
Unproductive 5. Warmth Coldness 6. Cooperation
Inconsistency?. Mutual support Malevolence 8.
Enthusiasm Indifference 9. Amusement Boredom 10. Success.
Failure Data Processing and Analysis
The answer for each of the 10 items is evaluated from left to right from 1 to 8 points. How
the sign * is located to the left, the lower the score, the more favorable the psychological
the atmosphere in the team, according to the respondent. The final figure fluctuates
from 10 (most positive) to 80 (most negative).
Based on the individual profiles, an average profile is created, which
characterizes the psychological atmosphere in the team.
4.2.2. Evaluation of the microclimate of the student group (V. M. Zavyalova)
Instruction. Please fill out this card. It offers indicators
characterizing the microclimate of the student group. The map was compiled according to the principle
polar judgments. On the left - judgments revealing the psychological climate with
on the positive side, on the right - on the negative side. Between polar
judgments are the numbers 3-2-1-0-1-2-3. Your task: first, choose
one of the polar judgments (left or right), reflecting a typical picture
relationships in your student group and the usual mood in it;
secondly, mark with a circle one of the numbers that corresponds to the degree
the severity of each indicator.
High degree of severity - 3.
The average severity is 2.
Weak degree of severity - 1.
If you find it difficult to determine which of the two polar judgments reflects
typical microclimate of your student group, then mark the number 0.
For example, referring to the first line, you know that in your group it is usually
upbeat and cheerful mood. But the severity of this indicator, in your opinion,
average. You need to circle the number 2 to the left of zero.
Faculty________________________. Well___
Group_____________________
Date of completion.
1. The group is usually in a cheerful and cheerful mood. 3210123 Usually in a group
depressed mood,
gloomy. 2. The group is active, efficient. 3210123 The group is passive, inert. 3.
The atmosphere in the group is calm, businesslike. 3210123 The situation in the group is nervous,
tense. 4. Students feel comfortable in the group. 3210123 In a group
students feel uncomfortable. 5, Students know and feel that the group is
will protect and support them if necessary. 3210123 Students do not have
confidence in the support of the group in difficult times. 6. Students treat each other
friend with affection. 3210123 Mutual relations in the group are characterized by antipathy. 7.
The collective treats all its members fairly, rewards each
merit. 3210123 The team is divided into preferred and neglected.
Biased in assessing individual members of the group. 8. Relationships of individual
microgroups within the team is characterized by mutual understanding, tact,
cooperation in common business for the team. 3210123 Groupings inside
collective conflict with each other, their members close in their own interests, do not
want to understand others. 9. Conflicts in the group rarely occur, due to serious
reasons are resolved fairly and kindly. 3210123 Conflicts
occur often, are resolved with difficulty, painfully. 10. During critical periods
the group is rallying. Guided by the principle "One for all and all for one".
3210123 In difficult periods in the team there is absent-mindedness, quarrels, mutual
reproaches. 11. Beginners feel welcomed and cared for.
groups. 3210123 The group shows indifference or hostility towards
newcomers. 12. Students enjoy being together in and out of college. 3210123
Students do not seek to be together, each lives in their own interests. 13.
Students love their group, rejoice at its successes, grieve at its failures. 3210123
Students do not value their group. Indifferent to her achievements, easily agree
to move to another group. 14. Students take their studies seriously, strive
master the secrets of the profession. 3210123 Study is not considered a priority,
striving for academic success is not encouraged. 15. The group is demanding
and intolerance towards lazy people and truants. 3210123 To lazy people and truants
treats condescendingly. 16. Students take an active part in
social life of the group. 3210123 Students are passive in public life
groups. 17. The group takes the distribution of public tasks seriously,
everyone's wishes and inclinations are taken into account. 3210123 Orders are distributed according to
principle "If only not for me." 18. Students are willingly involved in labor affairs
groups. 3210123 It is not easy to raise a group to a common labor cause. 19. Group asset
enjoying the support and respect of the team. 20. Relationship between group and
curators are characterized by benevolence, understanding, cooperation.
3210123 Relations between the group and the curator are characterized by antipathy and conflict.
Data processing (option by N. P. Fetiskin)
1. To determine the psychological microclimate (PM), it is necessary to add up all
positive points, then negative ones and subtract the smaller one from the larger amount.
2. Assess the level of PM by points:
50-60 points - high degree of favorability of the PM; 40-49 points -
medium-high degree of favorability of the PM; 21-39 points - average degree
favorable PM; 11-20 points - medium-low degree of favorability of the PM;
0-10 points - insignificant favorability of PM. Adversity PM
characterize scores with a negative sign, like a positive-level
qualifications.
3. A PM profile is compiled, showing the severity of each of the studied
components.
4.2.3. Diagnostics of socio-psychological adaptation (K. Rogers, R. Diamond)
Instruction. The questionnaire contains statements about a person, about his image
life, experiences, thoughts, habits, style of behavior. They can always
relate to our own way of life.
After reading the next statement of the questionnaire, try it on your habits,
assigned to you. To indicate your answer on the form, please select one of the
seven options for ratings, numbered from 0 to 6, suitable, according to your
Oh - this does not apply to me at all;
2 - I doubt that this can be attributed to me;
3 - I do not dare to attribute it to myself;
4 - it looks like me, but not sure;
5 - it looks like me;
6 is definitely about me.
Please mark the answer you choose in the box on the answer sheet.
corresponding to the ordinal number of the statement.
Answer form
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2! 22 23 24 2526 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36 3738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56
57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 87 68 69 7071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 8Z
84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101
Questionnaire
1. Experiences awkwardness when entering into a conversation with someone.
2. There is no desire to open up to others.
3. In everything he loves competition, competition, struggle.
4. Makes high demands on himself.
5. Often scolds himself for what he has done.
6. Often feels humiliated.
7. Doubts that one of the opposite sex can like.
8. Always keeps his promises.
9. Warm, good relations with others.
10. The person is restrained, reserved, keeps a little away from everyone.
11. Blames himself for his failures.
12. Responsible person; you can rely on him.
13. Feels that he is unable to change anything, all efforts are in vain.
14. Looks at many things through the eyes of peers.
15. Accepts in general those rules and requirements to be followed.
16. Own beliefs and rules are not enough.
17. Likes to dream - sometimes right in broad daylight. Difficulty returning from meta to
reality.
18. Always ready for defense and even attack: “gets stuck” on experiencing insults,
mentally sorting out ways of revenge.
19. Knows how to manage himself and his own actions, force himself, allow
to yourself; self-control is not a problem for him.
20. The mood often deteriorates: despondency rolls in, the blues.
21. Everything that concerns others does not care: he is focused on himself, busy with himself.
22. He usually likes people.
23. Not shy about his feelings, openly expresses them.
24. Among a large gathering of people, it can be a little lonely.
25. Now I feel very uncomfortable. I want to leave everything, hide somewhere.
26. Usually gets along well with others.
27. It's harder to fight with yourself.
28. The undeserved friendly attitude of others is alarming.
29. At heart, an optimist, believes in the best.
30. A stubborn, stubborn person, such people are called difficult.
31. He is critical of people and judges them if he thinks they deserve it.
32. Usually he feels not leading, but led: he does not always manage to think and
act independently.
33. Most of those who know him treat him well, love him.
34. Sometimes there are thoughts that I would not like to share with anyone.
35. A person with an attractive appearance.
36. Feels helpless, needs someone to be around.
37. Having made a decision, follows it.
38. Taking seemingly independent decisions, he cannot get rid of
the influence of other people.
39. Experiences a sense of guilt, even if there is nothing to blame yourself,
40. Feels dislike for what surrounds him.
41. Happy with everything.
42. Unsettled: cannot get together, pull himself together, organize himself.
43. Feels lethargic: everything that used to worry, suddenly became indifferent.
44. Balanced, calm.
45. When angry, he often loses his temper.
46. Often feels offended.
47. A person is impulsive, impatient, hot, lacks restraint.
48. Sometimes he gossips.
49. Does not really trust his feelings: they sometimes fail him.
50. It's hard to be yourself.
51. Reason comes first, not feeling: before doing anything,
will think.
52. He interprets what is happening to him in his own way. Capable of overthinking
Along with the formal structure, which reflects the obligatory, normative side of the organization, informal interpersonal relations always develop in any social group, which depend on the value orientations of its members, the peculiarities of how people perceive each other, etc. Knowing the nuances of the “personal” aspects of labor relations is very important for the group leader.
In any team, informal relations of mutual support, mutual influence, popularity, prestige, leadership, etc. develop. The quality of these relations largely determines the productivity and satisfaction of employees with work; unfavorable psychological climate in the group leads to instability of production indicators.
Sociometric studies make it possible to identify:
the structure and dynamics of intra-group relations;
level of development of the group;
the degree of cohesion-disunity of the group;
features of the socio-psychological climate of the group;
causes and driving forces of conflicts (intergroup and intragroup, interpersonal and personal-group);
informal leaders who deserve to be promoted to official leadership;
informal groupings, etc.
These data allow the manager to identify prosperous or conflict areas of intra-group relations, find out the causes of possible problems and develop effective measures to eliminate them, complete compatible working groups, and in addition, recognize informal leaders (“stars”) and make them their allies.
A lot of useful information is provided by the analysis of the obtained sociogram. First you need to identify the most influential members of the group, then identify mutual pairs and groupings, which are made up of members of the group seeking to choose each other (two or three people, less often four or more). Maximum high sociometric status- (+1) a person receives in the case when he is chosen by all members of the group, and the lowest possible - (-1) when everyone rejects him. In real groups, such extremes practically do not occur. The closer the status indicator is to (+1), the more reason to believe that this person is the unofficial leader in this group; the closer it is to (-1), the more likely it is that we are dealing with an outcast.
For members of the group, it is not so much the number of elections that is of particular importance, but satisfaction with their position. It can be calculated using the coefficient satisfaction (K beats):
If K beats = 0 with a high value of sociometric status, this indicates that a person is forced to interact not with those with whom he would like.
As a result of sociometry, it is possible to assess the place of each person in the group and relationship well-being in the group as a whole. The level of well-being is considered:
high , if there are more “stars” and “preferred” than “neglected”, “isolated” and “outcast”;
medium if these indicators are equal;
low , if there are fewer "stars" and "preferred" than "neglected", "isolated" and "outcast".
In addition, from the data obtained, it is possible to determine degree of team cohesion. It can be calculated using the coefficient cohesion (K c):
Analysis of the sociogram shows how active each person in the group is, how he is integrated into intra-group relations (or isolated from them), makes it possible to assess psychological compatibility group members. For this, it is used compatibility factor (K cm)
Important conditions for the effectiveness of the group are its cohesion(characterized by the strength, unity and stability of interpersonal interactions) and consistency- coherence, coherence (characterized by the success of joint activities and subjective satisfaction of group members).
Group cohesion coefficient (K gs) is defined as the difference between the coefficients of group unity (K ge) and group disunity (K gr) according to the formula:
K gs \u003d K ge - K gr
To calculate the coefficient of group unity, the formula is used:
The calculation of the coefficient of group disunity is carried out according to the formula:
group integration index- the result of dividing the total amount of positive choices by the total number of all choices made by all members of the group;
index of mutual sympathy (V (+) gr)- the result of dividing the sum of all mutual positive choices by the number of group members;
index of mutual antipathies (V (-) gr)- the result of dividing the sum of all mutual negative choices by the number of group members;
group conflict index (I kgr), which is calculated by the formula:
index of the relationship of a person to a group- the difference between the number of choices made by a given member of the group and the number of deviations made by him;
group-to-person index- the difference between the number of selections received and the number of rejections received;
mutual affection index- the number of mutual choices that this person has with the rest of the group;
mutual hostility index- the number of received mutual deviations (the coefficient of hostility shown in the relationship between this person and other members of the group).
The indices of the relation of a person to a group and the relation of a group to a person can have both positive and negative values. The indices of mutual like and dislike of a person can also be translated into “vector” indicators: if they are higher than the average value for the group, then they are assigned a “+” sign (for mutual elections) or a “–” sign (for mutual deviations).
The graphic representation of the obtained indices is called personal sociometric profile. For example, the species profile (+ + + +) indicates that the position of this person in the group is favorable in all respects, and the species profile (– – – –) indicates a clear disadvantage. Profile options containing pluses and minuses give a differentiated description of the position of a person in various subgroups.
|
Applied sociology has developed a solid arsenal of mathematical methods for analyzing the results of sociometric research. Of course, it is sometimes difficult to master all the formulas, learn how to calculate various coefficients and indices for a person who is not familiar with statistics. But for a practitioner, it is enough to navigate the possibilities that this or that research method provides. The main thing to understand is that if the problem is formulated clearly and competently, then you can always choose the necessary methods to solve it and calculate the necessary indicators (on your own or with the help of specialists). And yet, applying a new method in practice, it is not enough to master it “theoretically”, you need to test it at least once on yourself (if the technique allows it) or practice with colleagues. It is especially important to prevent possible negative consequences. |
The results of a sociometric survey allow managers to better understand the reasons for the behavior of people in a group, and, therefore, to manage more efficiently and effectively influence employees. The tasks of the working group, the requirements for its formal structure and functions are determined by the goals of the organization, at the same time, the processes and phenomena of group formation have their own patterns, which largely affect the effectiveness of the group. The formation and development of a working group is a dynamic process that goes through certain stages, or stages. Conventionally, they are called "formation" ( Forming), "fermentation" ( Storming), "normalization" ( Norming) and "activity" ( performing) (rice. 1).
Rice. 1. Stages of formation of the group
Stage I - group formation - characterized by a high degree of uncertainty of goals, structure and leadership. Members of the group behave cautiously, carefully follow every step of new partners, look at each other, formulate their positions, try different models of behavior. Individual execution of work prevails, while employees are guided by formal norms and requirements (working and disciplinary); interpersonal relationships are just beginning to form.
Stage II - fermentation - marked by manifestations of intra-group conflict. There is a clash of positions, problems are revealed, a discrepancy between basic individual values is revealed. Members of the group resist group control, but as a result of such a struggle, there is a distribution of responsibilities. Decisions are usually made on the basis of majority opinion. Through a series of conflicts in the group, a relatively clear hierarchy of intra-group leadership is formed. The main part of the energy is spent on establishing and developing communications and solving interpersonal problems.
Stage III - rationing - development and coordination of intra-group rules of activity, norms of "correct" behavior, common value orientations and friendly relations. The roles, functions and responsibilities of each are clearly defined, mutual assistance, mutual support and interchangeability are manifested. At this stage, the group acts as a holistic formation, the internal atmosphere in it improves significantly, intra-group identification and a “sense of elbow” are formed. The group independently seeks ways to resolve internal conflicts.
Stage IV - activity - that, for the sake of which, in fact, the group is created. At this stage, its formation is completed: the structure is extremely functional and accepted by everyone; group members are focused on achieving group goals (they accept them as their own), joint work itself becomes the basis for the existence of the group. Its members recognize individual differences as a value; the atmosphere becomes warm, each person feels the support of the whole group and is proud to be a part of it. The need for strict control of actions on the part of the leader is reduced, it is replaced by the collective control of the group itself, while combining high personal responsibility for the final result of the activity and collective responsibility for each member of the group. Internal interaction in the group is characterized by openness, constant feedback, joint consideration of results and the desire to improve overall performance, rivalry gives way to cooperation. At this stage of development, we can talk about the transformation of the group into command which not only works effectively, but also satisfies the needs for self-respect and self-development of each of its members.
Signs of a high level of organization of the group (except for general ones, such as the quality, speed and nature of the work) are:
the emergence in the process of work of a “government body” coordinating the work of all members of the group and a certain structure of their subordination;
clear distribution of responsibilities between group members;
development of a joint action plan and its implementation in the process of work;
lack of competition between leaders, conflicts and contradictions in the system of interpersonal relations;
strict (and voluntarily maintained) performance discipline;
high coordination of actions, interchangeability of group members;
demonstration of unity of opinion on significant issues at all stages of work;
high activity of all participants;
manifestation of initiative and creativity in the process of work.
It is possible to effectively manage a working group if the leader and members of the group understand at what stage of development it is and take into account the peculiarities of this stage. In real life, it is rarely possible to single out the described stages in a “pure form” (more often in critical cases). As a rule, several processes occur in parallel or even in different directions. At the same time, the staged approach makes it possible to see the general scheme and dynamics of the development of the group, and helps to better understand the problems that arise in it. The stages of group formation can only be distinguished conditionally - in real life they are closely intertwined with other group phenomena, such as leadership, group cohesion, group pressure on an individual, group decision-making, etc.
Managers rarely encounter "self-generating" groups, more often they have to solve problems associated with updating the composition of long-existing groups and changing their tasks. Often, the departure of an informal leader provokes serious conflicts, throws the group far back. The appearance of a newcomer in the formed group is also often complicated, since it is associated with the acceptance / non-acceptance of established group norms, resistance to collective pressure, etc. Often a new member does not agree with the role assigned to him; even outwardly resigned and following the requirements of the group, he resorts to "protective" forms of behavior:
withdraws into himself, demonstrates indifference to the goals of the group, lack of involvement, deepening into his own problems;
shows increased criticism in relation to the activities of the leader, individual members of the group or the group as a whole;
shows formalism: behaves emphatically politely, strictly follows job instructions and prohibitions;
tries to show servility or familiarity, to behave infantile, to be capricious;
tries to demonstrate a frivolous attitude to work;
obsessively forces the “establishment of relations”: overly talkative, calls the members of the group into conversations, persistently elicits “secrets”, talks about his own experiences, etc.
Such forms of behavior of a beginner can be attributed to the “pathological” course of the adaptation process, but they can also manifest themselves in other members of the group (at different stages), so the leader must be able to notice deviations in time and respond to them correctly. (A wait-and-see attitude—everything will work itself out—is usually ineffective.)
The progressive development of the group does not mean that its effectiveness is increasing in parallel. Groups can regress relative to the previous stage, split up; at the same time, cooperation in the group sharply decreases, cliques appear - associations of individuals, only formally connected with the goals of the group. Competition between cliques arises, a struggle for power begins, as a result, the efficiency of the overall work sharply decreases. Such forms of "organizational pathology", which bring huge losses as a result of a decrease in labor productivity and product quality, are quite common in practice. If the group fails to overcome disintegration processes, it breaks up, but if the group finds the strength to overcome the crisis (as a rule, the help of a wise leader is needed), development resumes.
The general views of the members of the group, their positions on fundamental issues, agreed decisions on current working problems and in relation to the events of the surrounding world, as well as the very process of their formation are called collective opinion. Allocate official (spoken openly) and informal (hidden from other persons, primarily from leaders) collective opinion. Often, it is the unofficial opinion of the collective that has the greatest influence on other socio-psychological processes in this group.
As a separate phenomenon, researchers distinguish collective mood- generalized emotional reactions of group members to the working situation, intra-group relationships, events of the "external" (in relation to the group) world. These are emotionally colored reactions and experiences of a certain intensity and tension, on which the readiness degree members of the group to take certain actions. The collective mood is distinguished by great strength, impulsiveness, dynamism and "contagiousness". It significantly affects the effectiveness of group activities (a bad mood reduces the effectiveness of work in a group by one and a half times) and largely determines satisfaction with the “quality” of group life, although it is not always amenable to rational management.
An equally important influence on the success of the group is traditions. They are relatively stable rules, norms and stereotypes of behavior, actions and communication in specific conditions (situations) that have developed on the basis of long-term experience of joint activity, which have become a need for each or most members of the group. Allocate official, professional, social, sports and other traditions. Emotionally attractive traditions become stable forms of group behavior, a kind of "group memory", the basis for the formation of group identity; they are maintained and developed by the members of the group themselves. It is important for the leader that traditions stimulate the development of the group, contribute to increasing the responsibility and discipline of its members. The destruction or loss of significant traditions significantly complicates the development of the group, just as memory loss becomes an obstacle to the full development of the individual.
The ability to influence the collective opinion, mood and traditions of the group is an effective management tool. Since any group is a complex and largely self-organizing object of management, it is more efficient to influence the group as a whole through informal leaders and "opinion leaders" (the most informed and authoritative members of the group).
Unlike the formal leader, the leader is not appointed, he takes a leadership position with the open or hidden consent of the group. The leader is chosen by a person who has experience and skills in organizational activities, is interested in the affairs of the group, is sociable and attractive. There are several types of leaders:
organizing leader can take responsibility, quickly and clearly distribute tasks, make prompt decisions, and provide control; he leads the group to the goal, actively interacts with all its members, enjoys influence and authority;
leader-initiator is able to put forward new ideas and proposals, take the initiative, captivate by his own example;
High intelligence, training or experience are only a prerequisite for leadership, but personal qualities such as a tendency to dominate, the ability to take initiative in interpersonal relationships, offer solutions, and the ability to speak a language understandable to all members of the group are crucial. Very often, the choice of a leader by a group and the degree of his "influence" is determined by the situation.
It is especially important to identify "hidden", "shadow" leaders. Underestimating their potential, the inability to use energy and informal (but very real) power over people for "peaceful" purposes, for the benefit of the group, is fraught with trouble. This can lead to the fact that they become "anti-leaders", destructors, begin to realize their personal goals to the detriment of both the group and the goals of the company as a whole. A “formal” (by position) leader should strive for constructive cooperation with informal leaders, provide them with additional powers, increase their authority, while relying on their strengths - organizational qualities, innovative potential, and communicative competence.
In psychology, the concept reference* group- a circle of significant people, whose opinions are decisive for a person and with whom he correlates his assessments, actions and deeds (contacting both directly and mentally). The definition of a “reference circle” is very important in terms of collecting information about relationships that are significant for a given employee. Reference status(preference) of a person for other members of the group is established using a special technique - referentometry, which can be attributed to the number of the most famous varieties of the sociometric method.
Allocate intragroup And outgroup referentometry options. With intragroup referentometry, the reference status of each member of the group is calculated, with external group - ranking.
The referentometry method allows you to identify the most significant members of the group for a person, whose opinion he is guided by when making important decisions. The measure of reference (preference) of group members for the subject is determined indirectly, through the manifestation of interest in their position on essential issues.
The referentometry procedure is carried out in two stages.
1. First, the positions (opinions, assessments, attitudes) of each member of the group regarding a significant object, event or person are identified. To do this, the subject is asked to fill out an evaluation form (for example, given in the appendix) - one copy for each of the group members (that is, each subject fills out n forms according to the number of group members). The name of the subject is indicated in advance in each form. There are various options for questions for instructions: you can offer the same wording as when conducting a sociometric survey, or you can ask to evaluate the professional qualities of each member of the group according to a number of criteria, etc. The time spent during the survey depends on the size of the group and the number of criteria in evaluation form.
2. Next, each subject indicates the names of three members of the group, whose forms with "his" assessments he would like to see. Thus, the members of the group are determined, whose position is of greatest interest to the rest.
In practice, the choice limits are in the range from 0 to 3 (the main thing is no more than three). There are options when one of the members of the group does not indicate any names - defiantly ignores the opinion of colleagues. This behavior can be explained by various reasons. More precisely, sociometric data will help to identify them.
For example, if a person demonstrates indifference to the opinion of other members of the group about him, this may indicate that he opposes himself to the group in conflict (open or hidden) or that he is psychologically incompatible with the group. Problems can be associated with the complexity of relationships between different generations (with a large age difference between group members), with a mismatch in the levels of professionalism (in the presence of "newcomers" and "old people"), with the rejection of group values by individual members of the group, with personal characteristics of people (such as isolation, resentment, increased conflict), etc.
Subsequently, the forms can indeed be shown to the members of the group who took part in the survey, motivating this by the fact that this is how a well-coordinated team should develop, in which the assessments of each are important for the development of all members of the group.
For the convenience of processing - by analogy with the analysis of the results of a sociometric survey - the data obtained (elections) are entered into a matrix. To increase the clarity of the results obtained, one can construct referentogram-target, which allows you to see the referential status of individual members of the group and the pattern of distribution of reference groups.
In practice, it is convenient to use matrices that include the results of calculating both the sociometric and the reference status of each member of the group. If the same limit of possible choices was used in both surveys (in our case, three), then the rating scales will be close, which will provide a clear comparison of the results.
As an example, we present the results of sociometric and referentometric studies in a group of employees of one department (six people). The data obtained are presented in a summary table.
Summary table of results of sociometric and referentometric studies
|
Status |
test subject |
|||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|
| sociometric | ||||||
|
Reference |
||||||
In this study, the sociometric status of a group member (as well as the referentometric one) was determined by the number of elections, based on its results, for clarity, you can build a diagram, as shown in figure 2.
Rice. 2. Comparison of the results of sociometric and referentometric studies
The referentometry procedure, which allows a person to get acquainted with the position expressed by a significant (reference) member of the group for him, encourages the subject to show high selectivity. The members of the group selected in such a situation constitute the reference group of this person.
With the sociometric approach, the main factor of choice in the system of interpersonal relations is sympathy-antipathy, and with the referentometric approach, competence in some area, therefore, sociometric and referentometric data may not coincide. "Stars" are chosen, as a rule, according to emotional preferences, and a person receives a referentometric status based on assessments of their business, intellectual or volitional qualities, professional knowledge and skills, awareness, etc.
For example, reference indicators indicate a high assessment and recognition by group members of employee Z as a competent specialist, while indicators of his sociometric status in the group are average (or even correspond to the level of “outcasts”). On closer examination, it may turn out that this employee is a "gray cardinal", so most members of the group understand his role in making group decisions, but do not accept the methods by which he implements his "powerful" capabilities. The data obtained with the help of sociometry and referentometry, together provide more voluminous and accurate information about the real role of a person in a group, and make it possible to identify the motives for choices and preferences in the group.
The importance of a thoughtful interpretation of the results obtained using formalized methods can be illustrated by the following example.
The director set the task to find out the causes of a complex conflict situation in one of the company's divisions. The results of sociometry showed that the attitude of all subordinates towards the newly appointed leader was sharply negative (he received only deviations). Of course, the lack of authority among subordinates is a negative fact, and it would seem that the “natural” solution should have been to replace the leader as soon as possible, who does not know how to work with the team.
At the same time, the referentometric status of the manager as a qualified specialist turned out to be quite high. But the labor discipline in the company left much to be desired. The workers are accustomed to the fact that the systematic theft of materials was not opened and not punished, the previous leadership "turned a blind eye" to these facts. The new leader was a man of principle and wanted to stop the theft in the unit: he threatened, reprimanded, fined (in general, "interfered with everyone and spoiled relations").
Considering the situation, taking into account additional facts, allowed us to see it in a completely different light and, accordingly, make a more effective decision.
Study and description of the history of the development of the group, the continuity of relationships during the reorganization; maintaining or changing the management style when changing leaders.
General assessment of the psychological climate, identification of group values, norms, opinions, moods, traditions.
Exploring Relationships horizontally- between members of the group (personal electoral relations - from sympathy and friendship to hostility and hostility), identification of microgroups (groups), determination of the sociometric status of individual members of the group. (It’s not bad if each member of the group is part of a group, the groups cooperate with each other, there is no obvious hostility between them.) Studying group leaders, identifying types of leadership in the group, describing the relationship between the leader and the formal leader (whether part of the authority is transferred to him ). The study of the causes of conflicts and isolation ("rejection") of individual members of the group. Recognition of reference groups, opinion leaders and the main channels for disseminating information and influence in the group.
Exploring Relationships vertically- between group members and the leader (formal power relations). Identification of the prevailing leadership style of the group, determination of the correspondence of the leadership style to the level of development of the group, the possibilities of strengthening the influence of the leader through work with informal group leaders and opinion leaders.
Training of group leaders, development of their basic management skills (“Line Manager School”).
Sociometric and referentometric results need professional interpretation. It is useful to supplement them with data obtained using other methods, such as document analysis, observation, structured interviews, expert surveys, testing, etc. team.
|
Application FORM Subdivision ________________________________ Instruction: Your department (team, project team, etc.) functions as part of the company as a single organism. You've been working together for quite some time now. During this time, you got to know each other well, certain business and personal relations have developed between you. The referentometric study is aimed at studying their features. You are offered pairs of words and phrases that are opposite in meaning. Please critically and unbiasedly evaluate your colleague (Full name of colleague) (please circle the number that corresponds to your assessment).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
_________________
* Reference(from lat. referens- reporting) - the significance for a person of the opinion and attitude of other people (including those who do not really exist, such as literary heroes, ideals to follow, etc.) or a group of which he is a member or considers it important, even without being real participant. This concept was first used by the American psychologist G. Hyman, who argued that people's judgments about themselves largely depend on which group they identify with.
Article provided to our portal
the editors of the journal
Scales: level of group cohesion
Purpose of the test
group cohesion- an extremely important parameter showing the degree of integration of the group, its cohesion into a single whole - can be determined not only by calculating the corresponding sociometric indices. It is much easier to do this using a methodology consisting of 5 multiple-choice questions for each. Responses are coded in points according to the values given in brackets (maximum: +19 points, minimum: -5). You do not need to enter scores during the survey.
Test
1. How would you rate your belonging to the group?
1. I feel like a member of it, part of a team (5).
2. Participate in most activities (4).
3. Participate in some activities and do not participate in others (3).
4. Don't feel like I'm a member of a group (2).
5. I live and exist separately from it (1).
6. I don't know, find it difficult to answer (1).
2. Would you move to another group if the opportunity presented itself (without changing other conditions)?
1. Yes, I would very much like to move (1).
2. Would rather move than stay (2).
3. I don't see any difference (3).
4. Most likely would have stayed in his group (4).
5. I would very much like to stay in my group (5).
6. I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
3. What is the relationship between the members of your group?
3. Worse than most classes (1).
4. I don't know, it's hard to say (1).
4. What is your relationship with management?
1. Better than most bands (3).
2. Approximately the same as in most teams (2).
4. I don't know. (1)
5. What is the attitude towards business (study, etc.) in your team?
1. Better than most bands (3).
2. Approximately the same as in most teams (2).
3. Worse than in most teams (1).
4. Don't know (1).
Processing and interpretation of test results
Levels of group cohesion
15.1 points and above - high;
. 11.6 - 15 points - above average;
. 7-11.5 - medium;
. 4 - 6.9 - below average;
. 4 and below - low.
