Harnessing the Power of Group Dynamics

Frank, the CEO of a major fabricated metal products organization, had a problem. Mark, his EVP of Marketing and Sue, his EVP of Operations, were always at loggerheads at Management Committee meetings. It got so bad, people's eyes would roll to the back of their heads whenever the two of them started going into a time consuming dialogue. After one meeting in which the two had a seemingly endless adversarial conversation, the others on the committee approached Frank to say he had to do something. "Those two are ruining our meetings and preventing us from getting to other important issues," they complained. Most said they were tired of Sue's constant challenges to Mark's ideas. They really didn't care what Frank did, but they wanted him to "fix it."

The situation outlined in the example above may sound familiar to many modern CEOs who bring their staff together to confer on matters of great strategic importance, only to have the forward progress of the assembly quickly stall as the discussion disintegrates into a civil but intense debate between only two of the participants. It often appears to be the same "road block" or "nay-sayer" who takes the floor and slows the proceedings to a mind numbing crawl. But with more careful examination, the perceptive CEO may discover that, in many gatherings, individual behaviors are often an expression of group and/or intergroup dynamics.

While the natural tendency is to blame the styles or personalities of the individuals involved or their relationship, such explanations do not give a full picture of what might be happening. Without a robust idea of all the major factors that could be causing the situation, the potential solutions available become limited. In this issue of Executive Insight, we will look at the multi-dimensional aspects of interactions among senior team leaders and how the dynamics involved, even though apparently negative in nature, can be better understood and even exploited to create improved decision making and more efficient implementation of strategy.

A Group Dynamics Model
In a model based on the work of Leroy Wells, Jr., we can examine the relationships between members of diverse groups by looking at them through four different lenses:

Intrapersonal
Interpersonal
Group-as-a-Whole
Intergroup

Just Another Personality Conflict?
At the Intrapersonal level, the assumption is that a person's behavior is impacted by his or her needs, character, personality, etc. These are the traits and characteristics that an individual brings to any group situation. They rarely change and are typically the same in any group the individual may be a part of.

If one assumes that the problem lies within one or both of the individuals, then an appropriate solution would be to provide personal guidance. For example, Mark might receive one-on-one coaching about the impact of his short temper and assistance in learning how to become more patient. Sue could get training on how to overcome her negativity. If both make positive progress in their personal development programs, then the meetings will become more productive.

At the Interpersonal level, an individual's behavior reflects his/her interactions with other individuals in the group. The focus is on the relationships between members of the group. If the problem appears to lie between Mark and Sue, then an appropriate resolution might be having them work with a mediator or teaching them negotiation or conflict management skills.

It all sounds so simple and straightforward. However, people who reach senior positions are generally more complex, competitive, smarter, and better defended against change. It will take a skilled intervention, one that helps the opponents align what they think they know, how they feel about change, and what new behaviors are necessary. This all needs to be done with timely feedback.

Nevertheless, in basic terms the solutions above are typical for problems within teams. However, there are other perspectives that typically are not considered which could give insights into additional factors causing the tension.

The Group-as-a-Whole
In addition to hypothesizing that the problem could be caused by individual personality traits or by the relationship between two people, one could examine the issue from the perspective of the dynamics of the Group-as-a-Whole.

At this level, a person's behavior is expressing or enacting a dynamic on behalf of the team (the group-as-a-whole). Members perform different roles, with each providing a particular function needed by the collective. In the example, Sue plays a specific role, but it is likely that neither she nor members of the team are consciously aware of its nature. When Mark makes a proposal, Sue often is the sole source of objections or concerns. She frequently requests more discussion or the input of others outside the Management Committee. Mark feels that Sue is always playing the role of devil's advocate and is the only team member with misgivings. "When I privately ask everyone else if they agree with me, they all assure me they do. Sue is the only one who disagrees with my point of view," he says. So to Mark (and maybe some others), Sue must be the problem.

At the same time, careful questioning can uncover the fact that Sue feels Mark, as the heir apparent to the CEO, doesn't get his ideas challenged enough. In fact, it is not unusual for team members to complain to her how they feel steamrolled by Mark. So from her viewpoint, the problem is both Mark's dominance and the reluctance of anyone else to speak up about their concerns at meetings.