Group and team dynamics in sport
- Created by: Elise_parfitt
- Created on: 26-04-19 15:03
View mindmap
- Group and team dynamics in sport
- Group formation
- Stage 3: Norming
- There is now much more agreement and consensus of opinion in the team. Roles and responsibilities are clearer and generally accepted.
- Decisions that are very important are increasingly made through group agreement. Less important decisions are delegated to individuals.
- There is now a stronger sense of community. The team is more social and individuals are more friendly with each other.
- There is general respect for the leader and leadership is more likely to be shared.
- There is now a stronger sense of community. The team is more social and individuals are more friendly with each other.
- Decisions that are very important are increasingly made through group agreement. Less important decisions are delegated to individuals.
- There is now much more agreement and consensus of opinion in the team. Roles and responsibilities are clearer and generally accepted.
- Stage 2: Storming
- Group decisions are difficult. Team jostle for position in the team as they attempt to establish themselves.
- There is no clearer focus for the team and they have a stronger sense of purpose, although there are many uncertainties.
- Cliques form at this stage and there may be power struggles. there needs to be an environment of compromise to enable progress. The leader has a more advisory or coaching role.
- There is no clearer focus for the team and they have a stronger sense of purpose, although there are many uncertainties.
- Group decisions are difficult. Team jostle for position in the team as they attempt to establish themselves.
- Stage 4: Performing
- The team has more strategies and has a clear vision and clear aims. There is no interference or participation from the leader.
- There is a focus on achieving goals, and the team makes most of the decisions against criteria agreed with the leader.
- The team members are trusted to get on with the job in hand with little interference. Disagreements occur but now they are resolved within the team positively.
- The team is able to work and be personable at the same time. The team does not need to be instructed or assisted. Team members might ask for assistance from the leader with personal and interpersonal issues.
- The team members are trusted to get on with the job in hand with little interference. Disagreements occur but now they are resolved within the team positively.
- There is a focus on achieving goals, and the team makes most of the decisions against criteria agreed with the leader.
- The team has more strategies and has a clear vision and clear aims. There is no interference or participation from the leader.
- Stage 1: Forming
- High dependence on the leader for guidance and direction.
- The group members start to get to know each other. There is very little agreement on the aims of the team.
- Each team member's individual roles are unclear and the team leader must be prepared to give strong direction
- The group members start to get to know each other. There is very little agreement on the aims of the team.
- High dependence on the leader for guidance and direction.
- Stage 3: Norming
- Team Cohesion
- Concerns the motivation which attracts individuals to the group and the resistance of those members to the group breaking up.
- FESTINGER (1963) states that cohesiveness is 'the total field of forces which act on members to remain in the group.
- CARRON (1980), cohesion has two dimensions
- INDIVIDUAL ATTRACTION TO THE GROUP
- -how attracted the individuals are to the group
- GROUP INTEGRATION
- -how the individual members of the group feel about the group as a whole.
- INDIVIDUAL ATTRACTION TO THE GROUP
- Concerns the motivation which attracts individuals to the group and the resistance of those members to the group breaking up.
- Group Performance
- STEINER (1972)
- actual productivity = potential productivity - losses due to faulty processes
- Potential productivity refers to the best possible performance of the group and must take into account the resources available to the group and the abilities of the individual; members.
- actual productivity = potential productivity - losses due to faulty processes
- If you bring the best individual performers together, you are likely to get the best team, but this is not always the case.
- STEINER (1972)
- The Ringelmann Effect
- The Ringelmann effect arises when the average individual performance decreases as the group size increases.
- Ringelmann found that in a rope-pulling task groups pulled with more force than an individual,
- but not with as much force as each individual pulling force put together - eight people only pulled four times as hard as one, not eight times as hard.
- INGHAM (1974) showed that this loss in performance was due to both co-ordination and motivational problems but was mainly caused by individuals within the group losing motivation
- but not with as much force as each individual pulling force put together - eight people only pulled four times as hard as one, not eight times as hard.
- SOCIAL LOAFING
- When some individuals in a group lose motivation, apparently caused by the individual losing identity when placed in a group. Individual efforts may not be recognised by those who are spectating or by those taking part.
- GROUP
- A collection of people who both share similar goals and interact with one another.
- Group formation
Similar Physical Education resources:
Teacher recommended
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made