" The cognitive approach underlines the fact that the importance of the variables mentioned above is not the same. Their impact varies from individual to individual and it is extremely difficult to accurately measure the personal value attributed to the elements under debate.
Amount is what the cognitive approach describes as the "perceived attractiveness or aversiveness of the outcome. Similarly, rate refers to the frequency that actions lead to rewards or, alternatively, the probability of acquiring the expected outcome" (Steel, Konig, 2006).
By establishing a relation of synonymy between amount and value as well as between rate and expectancy, the resulting equation moves the expectancy theory towards picoeconomics. Picoeconomics is a theory according to which people, when choosing from a multitude of actions with rewarding outcomes, favour the short-term positive results and not the long-term ones, even if in practice the latter ones are more important and with deeper impact (Steel, Konig, 2006).
Vroom divided the expectancy theory into two components, expectancy and instrumentality. "In this case, expectancy refers to whether the intended course of action can be completed successfully. Instrumentality refers to whether, having been successful, the expected rewards will be forthcoming" (Steel, Konig, 894). However, studies have shown that such division complicates things in a manner that does not seem to bring forth important advantages.
Group dynamics
The second major theme of the paper is represented by group dynamics. The complexity of the issue is obvious when taking into consideration all the involved variables and keeping in mind the relation between motivation, groups and groups dynamics. Groups are gatherings of people. Teams are also groups, but groups which consist in more than the sum of the individuals.
The relations between the members of a group/team are complex and of high importance when it comes to the efficient and efficacious functioning of the group itself. The roles played by the individuals, the status that they have, as well as the actual behaviour towards one another are all key variables in the discussion of group dynamics. Even if the functioning of a group is usually regulated by rules, this does not mean that these rules are always strictly followed (people have changing needs and feelings, they can not function like mere robots).
Uniformity among the members of a group has been proved to be counterproductive. Efficient outcomes of group actions have been demonstrated to rely on the diversity and multiplicity of skills. Usually, the members of a team are characterised by different expertise levels. This, for the team is both an opportunity and a challenge.
On the opportunity side, expertise differences can enhance learning within a team when more expert team members share knowledge and skill with less expert team members - to promote individual learning- or when different areas of expertise are combined to generate novel insights - to promote tea learning " (Van der Vegt, Bunderson, Oosterhof, 2006). As far as the challenging aspect is concerned, the issue is how to stimulate individuals in order to have them working at maximum capacity and at the same time maintain the group forces in synergy.
Bruce Tuckman conceived a model attempting to better explain the manner in which a team reaches maturity. He identified various stages through which a group passes. The changes underwent by the group are actually the changes underwent by the style of leadership. "Beginning with a directing style, moving through coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached. At this point the team may produce a successor leader and the previous leader can move on to develop a new team" (Tuckman, (http://www.monre.co.za/coaching/models.htm#Transactional_analysis).
The stages recorded by the transformation of the group are called forming (the creation of the group), storming (searching for the best manner to function), norming (deciding upon the best norms to be respected), performing (doing the actual tasks) and adjourning.
The first stage is characterized by a high dependence on the team leader, while the roles and tasks of the team members are not yet very clear. The second stage is characterized by a certain difficulty to take decisions. It is important in this phase to focus on what is best for the efficacious fulfilment of the team task rather than on the emotional issues which may occur. The norming phase is characterised by a successful collaboration among team members, while the performing stage has the team "strategically aware" and "with a high) degree of autonomy" (http://www.monre.co.za/coaching/models.htm#Transactional_analysis)
The...
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now