Listen to the various points of view and criticism also it is quiet, as well as that coincides with your point of view;

20. Listen to the various points of view and criticism also it is quiet, as well as that coincides with your point of view;

21. Separate efforts on generating of ideas from their estimation. At first collect all offers, and then discuss pluses and minuses of each of them.

Chapter 4. Potential of group and its productivity

Formation of potential of group is influenced by all its basic characteristics. But the special place among them is occupied with group norms. They are a core of all processes of group dynamics and directly are connected with productivity of potential both the group, and its each member and all organisation. The researches spent approximately at the same time by V. M. Bekhterev in Russia and E. Mejo in the USA, have allowed them to come to identical conclusions. It appears, it is easier to person to work, if the group which member it is, supports it and waits from it for good results. Efficiency of group considerably increases in that case at the expense of increase of individual productivity. Moreover, the group norm of productivity can increase several times if results of work of everyone influence success of the others and depend on their general success. E. Majo were explained by this phenomenon to what norms promote creation of atmosphere which not only defines behaviour of everyone who considers group the, but also strengthens display so-called effect when the general productivity in collective develops under the formula or 2+2 = 5, or 2+2 = 3. Positive or negative character of influence of this informal structure on productivity depends on variety of factors. J. D. Krasovsky divides them on two groups: the cores and variables. We them will name qualitative and quantitative. The qualitative concern:

1. Professional groups, indicators are interchangeability, complementarity;

2. The moral and psychological unity shown in norms of mutual aid;

3. Style of the leader J. D. Krasovsky includes in group of quantitative factors:

1. Group level of claims, that is mood of workers on achievement intermediate and end results;

2. Qualifying potential, sufficient for realisation of total and off-schedule indicators;

3. Requirements to an end result which defines group work;

4. An openness of assessments of works of group from outside the head, especially in situations of intergroup rivalry;

5. structure;

6. Intragroup interpersonal communications;

7. Time of existence of group;

8. Group norm of productivity.

Each of the listed factors 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 advantages. If it does not occur, the group can go on extreme measures: entirely will leave. In the fourth, each head of group should build with workers of the relation how it is demanded by law of interpersonal business dialogue.

However it was considered by the head of department of the information. It has admitted variety of errors:

1. Has made administrative decisions, without reckoning with opinion of group;

2. Has answered a call of the initiative employee, but has looked through reaction of group to this call;

3. Opposed to its group and has not understood, as well as why business relations have regenerated in the interpersonal;

4. Has transplanted it in a separate room and has received the formal. The relation of translators to work: completely;

5. At last, has definitively destroyed all relations when has achieved revision of bonus system.

The conclusion

In the conclusion it is possible to draw some conclusions and to formulate ten restrictions which disturb to disclosing of potential of group and its productivity:

1. Unfitness of the head its inability on the personal qualities to rally employees, to inspire them on effective working methods.

2. Not qualified employees a typical lack imbalance of functions of the workers, an inadequate combination of professional and human qualities. For example, Vudkok and Frensis offer interesting enough distribution of office roles according to which in each working group should be idea men the directing, the planning, carrying out a role the deterrent and a little executors. The combination of roles depends on specificity of the collective, thus one worker can combine a little from the listed roles.

3. Not constructive climate. It is characterized by absence at a command of fidelity to problems, there is no high degree of mutual support in a combination to care of the blessing of each employee.

4. An illegibility of the purposes. The insufficient coordination of the personal and collective purposes, inability of a management and the personnel to the compromise. Authors underline necessity of periodic updating of objects in view, differently members of collective lose representation about prospects of the activity.

5. Low results of work. It is meant that the collective should no on reached, should show aggressiveness in achievement of the significant purposes that promotes a high self-estimation of employees, growth of personal professionalism.

6. An inefficiency of methods of work. Value of the correct organisation of gathering and granting of the information, acceptance of correct and timely decisions is underlined.

7. Shortage of an openness and confrontation presence. Necessity of free criticism, discussion strong and weaknesses of the done work, existing disagreements without false fear to be misunderstood is marked, to break business etiquette, to cause the conflict. However in practice it is exigeant, or special preparation of the personnel and the head is required.

8. Insufficient professionalism and low culture of employees. Desire to have in collective of strong employees with high level of individual abilities quite clearly. It is possible to consider correct the point of view according to which the developed employee should be vigorous, be able to operate the emotions, ready to be open to state the opinion, to possess ability to change the point of view under the influence of arguments, instead of forces, it is good to state the opinion.

9. And 10. Low creative abilities of the personnel and not constructive relations with other collectives. Last two obstacles in a way of development of collective are axiomatic and do not require the comment.

The literature list

1.         Вайсман Р. С. Связь межличностных отношений с групповой эффективностью деятельности. // Вопросы психологии. – 1974. - №4

2.         Гибсон Джеймс Л., Иванцевич Дж., Донелли Дж. «Организация: поведение, структура, процессы». – М., 2000.

3.         Глумаков В. Н. Организационное поведение. М., 2002.

4.         Громкова М.Т. Организационное поведение. М., 1999.

5.         Карташова Л. Н., Никонова Т. В., Соломанидина Т. О. «Организационное поведение». М., 2000

6.         Красовский Ю. Д. Организационное поведение. М., 1999.

7.         Спивак В. Н. Организационное поведение и управление персоналом. СПб: Питер, 2000.