Creating More Effective Teams and Groups: Power Influence and Collectivism

Creating More Effective Teams and Groups: Power Influence and Collectivism

Cheyenne Dabbs Clement

        Teams are the basic functional unit of an organization.  They consist of various members who work interdependently to accomplish a common goal (Levi, 2017).  Merely understanding what a team is, how they function or why they’re important, alone, is not sufficient.  Teams operate in a complex and sophisticated environment.  As such, theory on group dynamics is constantly changing (Levi, 2017).  The purpose of this paper is to explore different theories concerned with team dynamics and discuss different methods to enhance team effectiveness.  Specifically, this paper will address leveraging power influence and psychological collectivism to encourage positive group change.

Power Influence  

        A critical issue discussed in communication research is concerned with the nature of change (Kelman, 1956).  It is not enough to know that change has occurred.  We must understand what kind of change occurred.  Is the change superficial in nature? – disappearing after a short lapse of time.  Is the change more enduring? – withstanding the test of time.  Is the change genuine? – expressed in both public and private?  Or is the change only expressed under the watchful observation of the public eye?  Kelman (1956) stated, “Only if we know something about the nature and depth of changes can we make meaningful predictions about the way in which attitude changes will be reflected in subsequent actions and reactions to events” (p. 51).  By understanding what type of change that occurred, we can better determine the motivational processes and durability of team initiatives.

        Kelman (1956) conducted an experiment designed to test different conditions, based on power and social influence, and the resulting changes on individual attitude.  Power influence, for the sake of this paper, will be used interchangeably with social influence and leadership power.  “Leaders vary in power and authority they possess” (Levi, 2017, p. 198).  There are numerous models of leadership in publication today.  Despite the differences in models, one common theme remains: a leader can draw power from various sources (position, knowledge, expertise, attractiveness, and personality, to name a few).  How leaders use - and potentially abuse - their power can affect the type of change expressed by a group.

        Kelman’s (1956) experiment extends from a theoretical framework concerning attitude change resulting from leadership power.  Kelman (1956) mentioned that attitude changes and actions resulting from social influence may occur at different levels.  The level and intensity of changes is dependent on the degree to which an individual accepts influence.  Or, to put it in other terms, the more a person accepts the terms of change, the more likely they are to conform to it.  The three different levels of conformity distinguished by Kelman (1956) included:  compliance, identification, and internalization.