1. Homework Complete the connector activities on the ‘Group Success’ Tab – answering the questions after reviewing the two videos Annotate ‘Ryder Cup’ article Questions on Page 203

2. KWL - sheet What do I know about group success? What I would like to know about group success? What have I learnt about group success?

3. Card Exercise Need one observer One group of 3 1 person on their own

4. How does this link to group success?

5. What is a group? Page 194 and 195

6. Evolution of a group - Forming – Storming – Norming - Performing - Tuckman (1965)

7. Tuckman’s model

8. What happened to AVB at Chelsea and now Tottenham and vice versa?

9. Different types of cohesion Cohesion Task cohesion Social cohesion

10. Group dynamics example

11. Bootcamp It takes people from all backgrounds, and from different parts of the country who may have nothing in common. They are given the same appearance, which identifies them as the same. The instructor gives them a shared negative experience that will give them something in common. In one quick experience they become a group.

12. Measuring cohesion Observation of behaviour Sociogram Questionnaire - The Group Environment Questionnaire

13. Do cohesive groups win? There are exceptions - Rodman and Jordan Desire to win may supersede personal dislikes task cohesion overcomes social cohesion Cohesion alone cannot ensure success.

14. Factors (antecedents) that contribute to cohesion (Carron 1982) What are the factors that affect group cohesiveness? (4 marks) Member characteristics Environmental / situational factors Leadership style Team elements

15. CARRON’S MODEL Page 197 Set our a Cornell table to make notes and ask questions

16. Carron’s model explained Group composition - gender, resources, compatibility, etc. Group environment - group size, home advantage, etc. Group structure - positions, status, norms, roles, etc. Cohesion - can be task or social – Task - group works to achieve a goal. – Social - group gets on well. Group processes - communication, co-operation, competition, etc. Group outcomes - winning, losing, outside of sport - starting a family. Individual outcomes - personal satisfaction, bonus, etc.

17. Strategies to develop an effective group and cohesion What strategies have your coaches / teachers used? Page 199

18. Productivity (Steiner’s Model) Actual Productivity Potential Productivity Faulty Processes = - If 2 individuals in a tug-of-war team are each able to pull 100kg, their potential productivity is 200kg. However, they will pull less than this, probably around 180kg - because of the inability to coordinate their efforts and/or because each person might expect the other to carry the main load. Therefore there are process losses of 20kg.

19. Who is going to win?? Group A will beat Group B if: – Group A possesses greater relevant resources and experiences fewer or equal process losses – Group A possesses equal relevant resources but experiences fewer process losses – Group A possesses less resources but experiences much less process loss

20. Football example with numbers If Arsenal ’ s potential productivity = 90 and Hull City ’ s potential productivity = 60, Hull can still win. If Arsenal experience process losses equal to 40, and Hull only lose 5, Hull ’ s actual productivity will = 55, while Arsenal will = 50. This is how giant killings happen each year.

21. Causes of process losses Process losses are commonly caused by: – Co-ordination losses eg… – Motivational loses eg…

22. Think back to the card sort

23. The Ringlemann effect Ringlemann observed individuals, groups of 2, 3, and 8 people pulling on a rope. Did 2 people pull twice as hard as 1 person? NO! 1 in a group of 2 pulled on average 93% of the individual score. In groups of 3 it fell to 85%, and groups of 8 to 49%.

24. Social loafing “The tendency for individuals to put in less than maximum effort when working as part of a group”. This is different from the Ringlemann effect. How? Latane (1979) found that people in groups do not clap as hard as individuals - individual effort is lost in a crowd!

25. How to beat social loafing and the Ringlemann effect! Identify individual contribution - individual playing statistics - this be detrimental to cohesion Increase peer pressure Improve group co-ordination skills (set plays) Select ‘team players’ Give more responsibility / set individual roles / targets

26. What else can coaches do? Limit process losses. Ensure that players are clear about their roles within the team. Establish clear team rules and expectations. Encourage social cohesion, but do not expect everyone to socialize together. Democracy increases cohesion - allow the team to make some decisions. Team building exercises.

27. Summary A group is 2 or more individuals working towards a common goal. Group cohesion can be related to the task or to social relationships. The Ringlemann effect and social loafing explain how some groups under-perform.

28. ‘ Team ’ talks Team talks are open only to group members. As such they bring the group together. Some team talks are more effective than others… Compare these examples

29. Video

30. KWL - sheet What do I know about group success? What I would like to know about group success? What have I learnt about group success?

31. What were the differences…? Next week… leadership