The Effect of Group Cohesiveness on the Quality of Group Productivity Competition among Senior Level Positions
When working to support business goals, companies want to reduce the areas that impede group cohesion and productivity. This narrowing of differences in work and responsibility has several consequences: (1) Companies looking for employees who are overpaid tend underscore marginal productivity. (2) However, the companies must pay high salaries to management in consideration of wage distribution, in particular, therefore, compensation for executive’s key employees. (3) Noting the market ignores the fact that wages on par provide attractive incentives for workers.
Companies that promote cohesion, as a rule, have characteristics that give the working groups the opportunity to act and assist the company to reach profitability. In addition to salary par distribution, research in psychology, sociology and management usually found companies that can benefit from greater coherence, not to use the threat of fire to motivate employees. In the long term working relationships, beneficial policy in the field of employment resources and good working conditions achieved the desired results of group cohesion.
Social scientists, who work in the behavior environment, feel it is often important to note that differences in pay between workers affect employee morale and productivity. Mora suffers more likely in the low-wage employee. In addition, these workers are often at risk of being openly violated with loss of employment. Reaction by the employer in such cases indicates there is a tendency not to satisfy the employees as a mass. The realization by higher management that economic survival and success require a relevantly qualified work force capable of adapting to new conditions leads to planning for that work force. “Stated more generally, the human resource management system must serve the overall objectives and mission of the organization and thus be linked to the strategic business planning process.” (Baehr, 1992, p3)
The effect on a companies earnings suggest greater cohesion without consequences due in part to the assumption hat companies must pay more to full time workers are in contrast to contract paid wages for temp workers. If wages comprehension assumes efficiency wages, human capital and or the explanation implies that some employees should be paid more, than most companies in considerations of cohesiveness should, means that other employees also must be paid more in competing companies
The implications for productivity, welfare and productivity of negative consequences of restrictions on mobility are clear: even the highest level of administration can be taken for granted in the workplace, even if their performance in comparison with poor morale at work. Employees are not motivated when their salaries are extremely low. Workers can take the low paid and therefore their marginal work results in a marginal product. Hence, long-term working relationships complicate the signing of new contract.
There are also significant benefits with reduced mobility. Companies can more easily invest in the company of human capital, and the problems of moral hazards clearly decline in long-term relationships. Finally, the lack of mobility reduces differences in wages, maintains a workforce, and retains the best employees.
In particular, what follow the promotion of cohesion are long-term employment relationships and the absence of external recruitment. High investment in society, human capital has become possible thanks to these long-term relationships difficult for outsiders, is as productive as leaders.
For example, companies generally offer a controlled cohort of employees who act as a peer group of experts to the company throughout their careers. Younger workers are relatively cheap so companies with high payment profile are focus on executives. It is expected companies that hire new workers at a high level reduce the number of increases in the lower levels, therefore reducing employee motivation. Any new company, which enters the market place and tries to recruit existing businesses resources, is faced with the problems of building a reputation as a good employer.
The increase in employment autonomy and the complexity often associated with improving the effectiveness of groups is dynamic. The study examined recognizes the effect of mediation via group cohesion. “Social groups seldom occupy a similar position in society in terms of group size, power, and status. Among these variables, many scholars consider power-or the extent to which individuals influence others and control their outcomes-the central variable underlying asymmetric intergroup relations.” (Yzerbyt , 200, p221)
The influence of individualism on the relationship between job characteristics (such as the complexity and autonomy) and the cohesion within the work environment is apparent current work environments. Our research shows that employment growth complexity and / or target greater autonomy promotes cohesion in the group, which is a better return on human capital investment. The positive impact on the complexity of the work and the independence of the group are also more visible to the testament of collective group.
At the same time, senior management focuses on tasks and results, but not in the tradition from 9 am to 5 PM- mindset. Provided career employees take into account task parameters, are not productive and results oriented with a boss hanging over their shoulders at each stage.
The competence of the model workers, especially young workers, (Harvey, 2008) often with interesting results have adopted for their environment the Results Only Work system. Just as it sounds, workers have problems, goals, and timetables, but left with the entire responsibility for delivery. Employees can set their own hours, work at home, and that only the quality of their work and their ability to meet deadlines will be the standards for compensation. However, some doubts – and hostility – among senior leaders, fear that they cannot “physically” see their employees, and therefore they cannot control. Much research documents that one of the culprits for poor group decision making is the desire for consensus. “This desire leads to premature closure, such as that evidenced by research on groupthink.” (Paulus, 2003, p63)
Productivity, competitiveness and development for many years, has composed the most important issues for the company’s strategy. Because of its impact on the economic and social development, it is of great importance as a source of income, as well as the integration objectives, including increased labor and management cooperation and employee involvement. The criteria for improvement the competitiveness and long-term strategies for businesses, employers, and employees internally to facilitate are necessary to promote productive employment competition. It is known that most productive companies, results-oriented policies, which is closely related to the marketing and competition for the best quality of life at work, participation, the principles of ‘market economy, individual initiative and creativity of the human-oriented management style and practice.
Performance objectives adopted by all interested parties become an important tool for equitable distribution of labor, conflicts of labor relations and workers of democratic participation. Consequently, productivity is a good tool to establish balance economic, social, technical and environmental problem solving. All interpersonal communication processes have beginnings. Often these beginnings are seen as just a means to reach the important matters. In fact, beginning well is extremely important, and the skills associated with it require study and practice. (Gottlieb, 2003, p71)
Performance and promoting employment are international long-term trends showing a strong correlation between national productivity and unemployment. Productive economies improve by competitiveness in international markets and thereby reduce unemployment. Businesses that are more productive can save more money for new investments and create new jobs. This is in direct contrast to those who believe that labor productivity leads to unemployment, especially in the longer term. In the short term, negative effects on the performance of unemployment can be achieved through sound economic and social policy. Consequently, productivity is the best indicator of where to invest and sources of funds for the creation of new jobs.
Economic democracy, for example, can be achieved through entrepreneurship, self-employment, and small business development, which will provide equal opportunities for everyone to start their own business or the business, or start a business together. These series of commitments, can only survive by increasing productivity and political and economic conditions for the implementation of economic democracy.
The main objective of senior level competition is more effective and profitable organization of economic and financial activities, conflicts of labor relations, and participation and sharing of gains among major projects. Therefore, increasing competition may be the common goal for all three parties – employers, employees and managers.
“Many reasons undoubtedly exist for this heightened attention. The primary motive probably has to do with the perception that by giving workers a partial stake in their company’s performance, profit sharing may, under
certain circumstances, lead to desirable outcomes that ultimately increase productivity.” (Blinder, 1990, p95)
Business according use of the comparative advantage of countries and their integration into the overall management of the supply chain fight for characterize indicators of competitiveness of countries and companies, and even between departments within the company. Cost-effectiveness and value-added performance targets. Production factors in the economy are very flexible and can be easily moved from one place to another. It is a strategy to combine the power and vision. Possession of the competitive edge is no longer just another priority – what matters is who controls and manages it.
Although the world economy often regarded as indicative of the market and economic indicator, which reflect local employment and services, thus it plays an important financial signal.
In this example, this paper examines a study of identity and solidarity between doctor-managers who work in a changing organization of health care. Identity marking compatible and interoperable within a group of professionals is indicative of high profile senior management in a much-needed cohesive environment. Social relations between the medical staff and the directors produce conflict, mistrust, and competition, In support of the existence of solidarity within the whole group, understanding the doctors; under the direction of professional managers of care demonstrate a change in the ideals of collective solidarity. A professional model given to a more common goal at the local level, in this case, the notion of cohesive cooperation. On a practical level, these results cast doubt over the long term in the medical specialty in the management of health care.
Real world working definition describes cohesion, as formative state, in this case, the spirit of enterprise and morale lifting. “We have seen that a key characteristic of high-status group members is that they have a tendency to initiate ideas and activities in the group.” (Brown, 2000, p290) Determining the importance of the components of cohesion is exemplified by the legal obligation of military service officials. As leaders in the officer corps, data measuring the level of cohesion in dimensions in the Air Force is overwhelming. The conclusion of this definitive research is army and Air Force officer cohesion have room for improvement as demonstrated thru strategies and measurements designed to improve consistency.
Confidence is important, which is the basis of a professional military environment. Trust is an organizational point of view; contribute to a commitment to meet the strategic objectives. Trust suggests that the purpose of the conditions will act in a manner that is conducive, which includes the human desire to be exposed to acts of others based on this mode. Unfortunately, in the officer corps is the perception of a serious erosion of confidence, which can be dangerous for the achievement levels of disadvantaged groups. In particular, there is a perception among senior military officers in the services or the army as a whole, must relent to civilian representatives for their own benefit. If the most important issue in the military profession, the current lack of confidence. Hence, there is a perceived lack of what is a function of a genuine dialogue between senior / strategic management and youth and level employees. Modalities and confidence building blocks around communication and relationships are critical. More importantly, the army as a profession is not a supporter of the concept of dialogue. This lack of understanding means that the perception of the erosion of confidence among the officer corps at the scene. Analyst and social researchers attempt to address this problem by defining the objectives and the military profession. However, determining the source of perceived erosion of confidence in a mission critical life threatening profession provides a broader and significant definition of communication on the terms of discourse, dialogue, and debate. It shows how the army and air force, in an attempt to create training, not to activate the dialogue in their efforts for apparent reasons.
Collectivist cultures may prefer more egalitarian pay structures while individualistic cultures may prefer more hierarchical pay structures. Defined by individualism as pertaining “to societies in which the ties between individuals are loose: everyone is expected to look after himself or herself and his or her immediate family.” “Integrating collectivism as defined as the opposite of individualism, pertaining “to societies in which people from birth onwards are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups, which throughout people’s lifetime continue to protect them in exchange for unquestioning loyalty.” (Brown, 2003) From a research perspective, this line of thought is useful in understanding the organizational performance effects of organizations’ international compensation practices.
In this case, increased knowledge of international cohesion and group practices is particularly important in an era in which organizational responses to heightened competitive pressures frequently include an increased dependence on global markets and opportunities.
Studies have implied that increased competition is associated with of group cohesiveness on the quality of group productivity. This body of work reports that demonstratively that these effects may occur because employee response was measured directly from empirical documentation and data. As shown here, once competition and cohesiveness is controlled, the effects of productivity and profitability dispersion are attenuated. Consistent with previous studies, the primary effects of corporate team and morale building are observed in comparatively higher employee hierarchical structure. A possible explanation for these results may be the tendency for individuals to inflate their own contributions and perceive inequity even when objectively may need to exist. Regression models show strong support for the hypothesis that workers’ perceptions of diversity in the leadership of the organization positively associated with ideas on the activities of the organization. As in this case, results are also based on the assumption that perceptions of employees on the proliferation of “Non-Aligned” senior managers have been positively linked to ideas about the activities of the organization. Corporations must ensure that they are fixed on measures that have a positive impact on workers’ perceptions of growth in the ranks of senior executives and management.
Thus, increased wage dispersion may increase the opportunity for individuals to perceive inequity. Given the growing evidence for the dysfunctional effects of wage dispersion in organizations, a greater understanding of its impact is needed. Organizational researchers have long noted that the notion of “pay” is loaded with surplus meaning, and perceptions of fairness and equity reflect these subjective interpretations
The results of this study, while not a direct test of the explicit mechanisms of direct business theory, understands theories in general to derive hypotheses about their likely effects in organizations. Unlike much previous research which has documented the mechanisms of social comparison and equity theories, this study shows how these processes can have important organizational consequences stemming from the design of organizational compensation structures.
The compensation of senior executives is a highly visible outcome in public corporations. It attracts the attention of reporters, researchers, and employees within the organization and is undoubtedly a part of the social comparison process and judgments about fairness and equity. Previous justifications for large differences in the pay of CEOs and senior executives have relied on economic theories with assumptions of active labor markets and the motivational properties of individual competition among players.
These theories have largely ignored considerations of fairness and loyalty. In contrast to these assumptions, the results reported here are consistent with the psychological benefits of equity and compressed wage structures, and show how wage dispersion and inequity may impose costs on senior teams and shareholders. These findings, along with a growing body of behavioral research on executive compensation suggest tl1e importance of bringing psychological theory into the modeling and design of executive compensation structures.
Although individual choices and strategies are important and efficiency concerns do have some role in explaining organizational arrangements and individual decisions, the current preoccupations overlook some important considerations for understanding careers and career processes.
In conclusion, firms that consider worker cohesiveness in setting wages will pay relatively egalitarian wages; that is, wages will vary less than for firms that do not consider cohesiveness, and they will vary less than do marginal products, as typically measured. Additionally, if cohesiveness considerations are important in internal goal setting then market outcomes will be par to optimal results. To maintain egalitarianism, competitiveness among senior management and cohesiveness, some firms will implement a compensate distribution model. Thus, this theory may explain why high employment is concentrated among progressive corporations.
In the context of our current research, calls for a new and different enterprise strategy may appear standard. The current model of employee development in this vast, open economy must adapt to face these challenges. There are significant areas of opportunity for organizations to exploit its natural advantages and to develop new areas of competence in pursuit of sustainable enterprises. To position human resources to exploit these and to grow robustly in the decade to come, there is an immediate requirement to redefine the strategy for enterprise policy and development in any enterprise.
Opportunities in world-wide multi national firms across a range of sectors and activities will play a more significant role in today’s economy, driven by increased international trade and enabled by advances in technology. The promotion of competition and innovation, international services will contribute effectively to the future growth of employee growth and enlightenment. Enterprises succeed by focusing on and advancing employee areas of activity.
Long-term skills sets will become progressively more important in the modern corporate setting, as the fast-changing nature of the workplace requires staff to be more flexible and adaptable and goal oriented. This type of initiative would encourage greater participation in ongoing advancement coupled with anticipated competitiveness, by facilitating and motivating employees continually increasing their skills by further incentives.
To further facilitate expertise in internal employee development and to respond swiftly and efficiently to the needs of business, corporate wide initiatives are needed to support the emergence of strong rank and file employee participation. These will be responsible for the identification of common interests, a clear agenda, and action-oriented objectives.
Vincent Yzerbyt – Charles M. Judd – Olivier Corneille – The Psychology of Group Perception: Perceived Variability, Entitativity, and Essentialism. Publisher: Psychology Press. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 2003. Page Number: 221.
Paul B. Paulus – Bernard A. Nijstad – Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration Publisher: Oxford University Press. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 2003. Page Number: 63.
Marvin R. Gottlieb – Managing Group Process. Publisher: Praeger. Place of Publication: Westport, CT. Publication Year: 2003. Page Number: 71.
Alan S. Blinder Paying for Productivity: A Look at the Evidence. Publisher: Brookings Institution. Place of Publication: Washington, DC. Publication Year: 1990. Page Number: 95.
Rupert Brown Processes: Dynamics Within and Between Groups Published by Blackwell Publishing, 2000 pg290
Mark Brown Global Perspectives On The Antecedents And Consequences Of Top Management Team Pay Structures: An Investigation Of The Implications Of Individualism And Collectivism Aib-Se (Usa) 2003 Annual Meeting, Clearwater, Fl , Bradley University
Melany E. Baehr – author. Predicting Success in Higher-Level Positions: A Guide to the System for Testing and Evaluation of Potential. Contributors: Publisher: Quorum Books. Place of Publication: New York. Publication Year: 1992. Page Number: 3.
Ian Harvey – http://www.businessedge.ca/article.cfm/newsID/17023.cfm 2008 Generation Y turns tables on employers Companies learn different approach needed with younger workers – Business Edge