Зверев_ Phd Summary (Групповая динамика формирования рабочих групп в социально-психологическом тренинге)

National Research University Higher School of EconomicsZverev DmitryGroup dynamics of work groups formation in the sociopsychological trainingSummary of the PhD HSE thesisAcademic Supervisor:Wladimir A. StrohPhDMoscow – 2018GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE DISSERTATIONRationale of a subject of the researchIn the 21st century high-tech solutions became available practically to everyone, andcosts of production were significantly reduced due to the displacement of the largest factories tothe territory of Third World countries.

It has led to the fast growth of intensity of business processes in all spheres of the industry and new mass "rush for innovations". The organizations areforced to exist in the conditions of the highest competition and the unstable external environment.Also in this regard tasks of services of management of human resources in the modernorganizations have changed. Besides search, selection, adaptation and training of employees,active influence on key performance indicators of the enterprises such as high efficiency of workof personnel, low turnover of staff, effective internal and external communications, involvementof personnel and etc.

became their significant function. It in a bigger degree staticized need ofuse of socio-psychological tools for increase in efficiency of the organizations (Bazarov, 2005).Nowadays the temporary work groups, most often called "teams" have been designed toprovide prosperity of the organizations due to constant search of the new ideas and their intensive introduction. This concept was earlier actively used in sport, but very quickly became popular in business too. In an administrative lexicon such terms as "teams", "design teams", "crossfunctional teams", "management teams", etc.

have appeared. The movement of "team management" considering the organizations as set of teams of various types and seeking to use synergetic effect which results from joint activity of the managers and specialists of the enterprise unitedin small groups has appeared and has gained a huge number of supporters. As opposed to thismovement there was an idea of team "tyranny" exposing negative manifestations of team management. According to this approach the advantages of group interaction are shown only in cases of their active and purposeful formation, usual group interaction can even reduce efficiencyof the organization.In the Soviet social psychology labor collectives traditionally were considered as subjects of the effective solution of tasks of the organizations.

The concept "collective" has beeninvestigated in various contexts, considerable material for the analysis of its features and efficiency which is considered by us in this dissertation work is saved up. However, after the collapse of the USSR the number of researches of collective has considerably decreased, studyingof work group as it is has substituted it. So, modern researchers note that the concept "team" iscollective for all work groups aimed at performance of a task which participants have to cooperate to achieve a common goal (Koenig, Schattenhofer, 2014). Therefore in this dissertation forall collectives and teams in the organizations the uniform term "work group" is used.The main socio-psychological method of increase in efficiency of the work groups is thesocio-psychological training for formation of the work groups.

In the modern researches devotedto the study of this phenomenon procedures and the effect caused by them are described, at thesame time criteria of efficiency of such training processes aren't defined (Gubiyev, 2004;Dzyubenko, 2001; Kalinin, 2009; Kartashevich, 2008; Kulikova, 2015; Filindash, 2009; Halina,2011). At measurement of effectiveness of similar actions only the questioning directed to assessment of an emotional background during the course and at completion stage of a training isused in most cases.Today D. Kirkpatrik's model (improved by J. Phillips) by which economic efficiency ismainly estimated is widely applied to measurement of efficiency of trainings in the organizations. However, the similar systems of assessment are considered being directed to receivinginformation for adoption of concrete administrative decisions and far from the interests of a scientific psychological research (Bolotova, Zhukov, 2015).

Besides that, such financial modelscan't be universal as they are implemented in a concrete organizational context. Therefore in thisresearch all results of a socio-psychological training which are achieved regardless of the expenses necessary for providing, meaning socio-psychological effects of a training are estimated(Zhukov, 2004).Programs of a socio-psychological training for formation of the work groups can be designated in a different way: "team building training", "work group training", "team forming","team coaching" and etc. Content and duration of these programs also differ up to the degreethat such action sometimes ends up not being a training but a corporate holiday or a sports competition.

For such actions the following purposes are often declared in some formulation: formation of the effective united work groups, normalization of the psychological atmosphere,general increase in efficiency of the organization, etc. At the same time designation of actionsand elements of their programs often don't represent the uniform interconnected methodicalcomplex, can be separated or are even opposite on the socio-psychological and organizationalorientation.In trainings of development of communicative knowledge, abilities and social attitudesthe final results have mainly individual character.

Unlike them, the training for formation of thework groups first of all is directed to constructive and active disclosure of potential of processesof group dynamics. In this regard we believe that updating of these processes and their development and also features of each of them have the most significant effect on efficiency of a training for formation of the work groups, on what effects will be reached in group finally.

Subsequently, it has to lead to an increase in organizational efficiency of group. So, when developingthe program of a socio-psychological training for formation of the work groups it is necessary toplan first of all active impact on the processes proceeding in training groups.Researchers normally study processes of spontaneous development and purposeful formation of the work groups and also features of training groups. For example, the importance ofprocesses of group unity and group cohesion of the groups was studied by Y.

Makarov, at thesame time the author considers these processes as the defining factor of efficiency of the workgroup (Makarov, 1998). In M. Gubiyev's research approach at which process of formation ofadherents as the factor of an increase in efficiency of the organization is defined by mindsetcompatibility of members of the team with the leader (Gubiyev, 2004) is implemented that isconnected with process of group cohesiveness. In dissertation of S. Barinov the importance ofreduction of the work groups of the organization to a social psychological "ideal" reveals (Barinov, 2007). In the study of A. Halina formation of the work group is also considered as sociopsychological process and technology in management of the organization (Halina, 2011).3Over time the scientific community has come to understanding of need of individual approach to formation of the work groups.

In the dissertation research E. Kartashevich draws theconclusion that process of formation of the work groups and the principle of group work aren'tuniversal (Kartashevich, 2008). In P. Filindash's research is shown that the technology of formation of the work group has to be constructed individually for each object, proceeding fromthe existing stage and features of its development (Filindash, 2009). Individual approach to process of formation of the work groups is also realized in the work of P. Hasina. The author pointsto the importance of role structure of the work group for the analysis of dynamics of its efficiency (Hasina, 2011). The importance of role structure of the work group as one of factors of itsefficiency is confirmed by V.

Stroh's researches (Stroh, Ostroukhova, 2012).Our research is conducted throughout the specified works and, thus, considers sociopsychological conditions when forming the work group. We assume that the key to effectiveformation of the work group is in considering type of group and characteristics of the processesof group dynamics proceeding in it. The concept "characteristic" is used by us as the form containing these concrete studying of features of the studied object (Zinchenko, Meshcheryakov,1996). In this context the studied object is the work group, and the form containing concrete data of studying of the features is a “palette" of the actualised group processes in it.At the moment of preparation of programs of a socio-psychological training for formation of the work groups normally the type of the work group, despite prevalence of ideas ofdistinction of groups on the most different criteria, isn't considered (Chanko, 2007).

And theproceeding socio-psychological processes in groups of various types are studied insufficiently.The researches devoted to processes of group dynamics, necessary for effective formation of the work groups (group identification (Klimov, 2015; Krichevsky, Dubovskaya, 1981;Sidorenko, 2015), group standard setting (Bolshakov, 1996), group cohesion process (Dontsov,1988; Makarov, 2010), role differentiation (Zavyalova, Loginova, 2008; Kosheleva, 2007),group leadership (Bazarov, 2005; Ilyin, Kondratyev, 2012) and group decision-making (Bolotova, Zhukov, 2015; Eliseenko, 2016; Karpov, 2000; Petrovsky, 1989), are carried out separatelyfrom studying of other phenomena of group dynamics and don't consider types of the workgroups.A.G.

Kovalyov wrote in his thesis that the results area of action of group processes during the socio-psychological training is defined in three components of influence on the identityof participants: emotional, cognitive and behavioral (Kovalyov, 1980). Y. Makarov also supports this three-component approach on the basis of the analysis of monographs concerningformation of the work groups (Makarov, 2010).In the context of the aforesaid becomes possible to formulate a research problem.