Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight

FOUNDATIONS OF GROUP BEHAVIOR

1. A group is defned as two or more individuals, interacting and
interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives.
2. Groups can be either formal or informal.
Formal groupsthose defned by the organiation!s structure, with
designated wor" assignments establishing tas"s
a. #he behaviors that one should engage in are stipulated by and directed
toward organiational goals.
b. An airline $ight crew is an e%ample of a formal group.
Informal groupsalliances that are neither formally structured nor
organiationally determined
a. &atural formations in the wor" environment in response to the need for
social contact
b. #hree employees from di'erent departments who regularly eat lunch
together is an informal group.
(. )t is possible to sub*classify groups as command, tas", interest, or friendship
groups.
Command groups are dictated by the formal organiation.
a. #he organiation chart determines a command group.
b. +omposed of direct reports to a given manager
Task groupsorganiationally determinedrepresent those wor"ing together
to complete a job tas".
a. A tas" group!s boundaries are not limited to its immediate hierarchical
superior. )t can cross command relationships.
b. ,or instance, if a college student is accused of a campus crime, it may
re-uire communication and coordination among the dean of academic
a'airs, the dean of students, the registrar, the director of security, and
the student!s advisor.
c. All command groups are also tas" groups, but the reverse need not be
true.
An interest group. .eople who a/liate to attain a specifc objective with
which each is concerned.
a. 0mployees who band together to have their vacation schedules altered
b. ,riendship groups often develop because the individual members have
one or more common characteristics.
c. 1ocial alliances, which fre-uently e%tend outside the wor" situation, can
be based on similar age or ethnic heritage.
Informal groups satisfy their members! social needs.
a. #hese types of interactions among individuals, even though informal,
deeply a'ect their behavior and performance.
b. #here is no single reason why individuals join groups.
1
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
c. 0%hibit 2*1 summaries the most popular reasons people have for joining
groups.
1tages of Group 3evelopment
A. The Five-Stage Model (Exhiit !-"#
1. Forming$
+haracteried by a great deal of uncertainty about the group!s purpose,
structure, and leadership.
4embers are trying to determine what types of behavior are acceptable.
1tage is complete when members have begun to thin" of themselves as part
of a group.
2. Storming$
5ne of intragroup con$ict. 4embers accept the e%istence of the group, but
there is resistance to constraints on individuality.
+on$ict over who will control the group.
6hen complete, there will be a relatively clear hierarchy of leadership within
the group.
(. %orming7
5ne in which close relationships develop and the group demonstrates
cohesiveness.
#here is now a strong sense of group identity and camaraderie.

1tage is complete when the group structure solidifes and the group has
assimilated a common set of e%pectations of what defnes correct member
behavior.
8. &erforming$
#he structure at this point is fully functional and accepted.
Group energy has moved from getting to "now and understand each other to
performing.
,or permanent wor" groups, performing is the last stage in their
development.
9. Ad'ourning$
,or temporary committees, teams, tas" forces, and similar groups that have
a limited tas" to perform, there is an adjourning stage.
)n this stage, the group prepares for its disbandment. Attention is directed
toward wrapping up activities.
2
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
:esponses of group members vary in this stage. 1ome are upbeat, bas"ing in
the group!s accomplishments. 5thers may be depressed over the loss of
camaraderie and friendships.
;. 4any assume that a group becomes more e'ective as it progresses through
the frst four stages. 6hile generally true, what ma"es a group e'ective is more
comple%. <nder some conditions, high levels of con$ict are conducive to high
group performance.
=. Groups do not always proceed clearly from one stage to the ne%t. 1ometimes
several stages go on simultaneously, as when groups are storming and
performing. Groups even occasionally regress to previous stages.
2. Another problem is that it ignores organiational conte%t. ,or instance, a study
of a coc"pit crew in an airliner found that, within ten minutes, three strangers
assigned to $y together for the frst time had become a high*performing group.

>. #he strong organiational conte%t provides the rules, tas" defnitions,
information, and resources needed for the group to perform.
(. An Alternative Model$ For Temporar) *roups +ith ,eadlines
1. #emporary groups with deadlines do not seem to follow the previous model.
#heir pattern is called the pun-tuated-e.uilirium model. 1tudies indicate their
own uni-ue se-uencing. (Exhiit !-/#.
2. .hase )#he frst meeting sets the group!s direction? the frst inertia phase. A
framewor" of behavioral patterns and assumptions emerges. #hese lasting
patterns can appear as early as the frst few seconds of the group!s life can.
(. #hen a transition ta"es place when the group has used up half its allotted time.
#he group!s direction becomes f%ed and is unli"ely to be ree%amined
throughout the frst half of the group!s life.
#he group tends to stand still or become loc"ed into a f%ed course of action.
#he group is incapable of acting on new insights in .hase 1.
8. #he midpoint appears to wor" li"e an alarm cloc", heightening members!
awareness that their time is limited and that they need to @get moving.A A
transition initiates major changes.
9. #his ends .hase 1 and is characteried by a concentrated burst of changes,
dropping of old patterns, and adoption of new perspectives. #he transition sets
a revised direction for .hase 2.
;. .hase 2 is a new e-uilibrium or period of inertia. )n this phase, the group
e%ecutes plans created during the transition period.
=. #he group!s last meeting is characteried by mar"edly accelerated activity.
3
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
2. #he punctuated*e-uilibrium model characteries groups as e%hibiting long
periods of inertia interspersed with brief revolutionary changes triggered
primarily by their members! awareness of time and deadlines.
Group 1tructure
1. Formal 0eadership
Almost every wor" group has a formal leader.
#ypically identifed by title
#his leader can play an important part in the group!s success+hapter 11 B
12 reviews the research.
2. 1oles
All group members are actors, each playing a role.
@A set of e%pected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a
given position in a social unit.A
6e are re-uired to play a number of diverse roles, both on and o' our jobs.
4any of these roles are compatible? some create con$icts.
3i'erent groups impose di'erent role re-uirements on individuals.
(. 1ole identit)
#here are certain attitudes and actual behaviors consistent with a role, and
they create the role identity.
.eople have the ability to shift roles rapidly when they recognie that the
situation and its demands clearly re-uire major changes.
8. 1ole per-eption
5ne!s view of how one is supposed to act in a given situation is a role
perception.
6e get these perceptions from stimuli all around usfriends, boo"s, movies,
television.
#he primary reason that apprenticeship programs e%ist is to allow beginners
to watch an @e%pert,A so that they can learn to act as they are supposed to.
9. 1ole expe-tations
Cow others believe you should act in a given situation
Cow you behave is determined to a large e%tent by the role defned in the
conte%t in which you are acting.
6hen role e%pectations are concentrated into generalied categories, we
have role stereotypes.
#he psychological contract is an unwritten agreement that e%ists between
employees and their employer.
a. )t sets out mutual e%pectationswhat management e%pects from
wor"ers, and vice versa.
b. )t defnes the behavioral e%pectations that go with every role.
c. )f role e%pectations as implied are not met, e%pect negative repercussions
from the o'ended party.
4
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
;. 1ole -on2i-t$
@6hen an individual is confronted by divergent role e%pectationsA
)t e%ists when compliance with one role re-uirement may ma"e more di/cult
the compliance with another.
All of us have faced and will continue to face role con$icts. #he critical issue
is how con$icts imposed by divergent e%pectations impact on behavior.
#hey increase internal tension and frustration.
A. An experiment$ 3imardo4s Simulated &rison
1. +onducted by 1tanford <niversity psychologist .hilip Dimbardo and associates.
#hey created a @prisonA in the basement of the 1tanford psychology building.
2. #hey hired two*doen emotionally stable, physically healthy, law*abiding
students who scored @normal averageA on e%tensive personality tests. 0ach
student was randomly assigned the role of @guardA or @prisoner.A
(. #o get the e%periment o' to a @realisticA start, Dimbardo got the cooperation of
the local police department7
.olice went, unannounced, to the future prisoners! homes, arrested and
handcu'ed them, put them in a s-uad car in front of friends and neighbors,
and too" them to police head-uarters where they were boo"ed and
fngerprinted.
,rom there, they were ta"en to the 1tanford prison.
8. At the start of the planned two*wee" e%periment, there were no measurable
di'erences between those assigned to be guards and those chosen to be
prisoners.
#he guards received no special training in how to be prison guards.
#hey were told only to @maintain law and orderA in the prison and not to ta"e
any nonsense.
.hysical violence was forbidden.
9. #o simulate further the realities of prison life, the prisoners were allowed visits.
;. 4oc" guards wor"ed eight*hour shifts? the moc" prisoners were "ept in their
cells around the cloc" and were allowed out only for meals, e%ercise, toilet
privileges, head*count lineups, and wor" details.
=. )t too" the @prisonersA little time to accept the authority positions of the
guards, or the moc" guards to adjust to their new authority roles.
After the guards crushed a rebellion, the prisoners became increasingly
passive.
#he prisoners actually began to believe and act as if they were inferior and
powerless.
5
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
2. 0very guard, at some time during the simulation, engaged in abusive,
authoritative behavior. &ot one prisoner said, @1top this. ) am a student li"e you.
#his is just an e%perimentEA
>. #he simulation actually proved too successful in demonstrating how -uic"ly
individuals learn new roles. #he researchers had to stop the e%periment after
only si% days because of the pathological reactions that the participants were
demonstrating.
1F. 6hat should you conclude from this prison simulationG
#he participants had learned stereotyped conceptions of guard and prisoner
roles from the mass media and their own personal e%periences in power and
powerless relationships at home.
#his allowed them easily and rapidly to assume roles that were very di'erent
from their inherent personalities.
(. %orms
1. All groups have norms@acceptable standards of behavior that are shared by
the group!s members.A &orms tell members what they ought and ought not to
do under certain circumstances.
2. Cawthorne 1tudies.
0%periments conducted between 1>28 and 1>(2 by 0lton 4ayo at 6estern
0lectric at the company!s Cawthorne 6or"s in +hicago.
1tudies conclude that a wor"er!s behavior and sentiments were closely
related
Group in$uences were signifcant in a'ecting individual behavior
Group standards were highly e'ective in establishing individual wor"er
output
4oney was less a factor in determining wor"er output
(. A wor" group!s norms are uni-ue, yet there are still some common classes of
norms.
&erforman-e norms are probably the most common class of norms.
a. 0%plicit cues on how hard they should wor", how to get the job done,
their level of output, appropriate levels of tardiness, and the li"e
b. #hese norms are e%tremely powerful in a'ecting an individual
employee!s performance.
Appearan-e norms include things li"e appropriate dress, loyalty to the wor"
group or organiation, when to loo" busy, and when it is acceptable to goof
o'.
So-ial arrangement norms come from informal wor" groups and primarily
regulate social interactions within the group.
Allo-ation of resour-es norms can originate in the group or in the
organiation.
6
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
8. +onformity
#here is considerable evidence that groups can place strong pressures on
individual members to change their attitudes and behaviors to conform to
the group!s standard.
)ndividuals conform to the important groups to which they belong or hope to
belong. Cowever, all groups do not impose e-ual conformity pressures on
their members. )mportant groups are referred to as referen-e groups.
#he reference group is characteried as one where the person is aware of the
others? the person defnes himself or herself as a member, or would li"e to
be a member? and the person feels that the group members are signifcant to
himHher.
#he pressure that group e%erts for conformity was demonstrated by 1olomon
Asch. (See Exhiit !-5#. Groups of seven or eight people were as"ed to
compare two cards held by the e%perimenter. 5ne card had one line, the
other had three lines of varying length. <nder ordinary conditions, subjects
made fewer than one percent errors.
6ill the pressures to conform result in an unsuspecting subject I<11J
altering hisHher answer to align with the othersG
#he e%periment began with several sets of matching e%ercises. All the
subjects gave the right answers.
5n the third set, however, the frst subject gave an obviously wrong
answer, the ne%t subject gave the same wrong answer, and so did the
others until it got to the un"nowing subject.
#he results obtained by Asch demonstrated that over many e%periments
and many trials, subjects conformed in about (=K of the trials? the
subjects gave answers that they "new were wrong but that were
consistent with the replies of other group members.
9. Cas time altered the validity of these fndings of nearly 9F years ago, and are
they generaliable across culturesG
#here have been changes in the level of conformity over time. Levels of
conformity have steadily declined.
Asch!s fndings are culture*bound. +onformity to social norms is higher in
collectivist cultures than in individualistic cultures.
;. 3eviant 6or"place Mehavior7 I0%hibit 2*9J. #his term covers a full range of
antisocial actions by organiational members that intentionally violate
established norms and that result in negative conse-uences for the
organiation, its members, or both.
:udeness is on the rise and 12 percent of those who e%perienced it actually
-uit their jobs.
7
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
6hen deviant wor"place behavior occurs it can a'ect employee
commitment, cooperation, and motivation. #his could lead to performance
issues and a lac" of job satisfaction.
C. Status
1. 1tatus is a socially defned position or ran" given to groups or group members
by others. 6e live in a class*structured society despite all attempts to ma"e it
more egalitarian.
2. 6hat ,etermines Status7
1tatus characteristics theory N di'erences in status characteristics create
status hierarchies within groups.
1tatus derived from one of three sources7 the power a person wields over
others? a person!s ability to contribute to group!s goals? individual!s personal
characteristics.
/. Status and norms7
Cigh*status members of groups often are given more freedom to deviate
from norms than other group members.
Cigh*status people also are better able to resist conformity pressures.
#he previous fndings e%plain why many star athletes, famous actors, top*
performing salespeople, and outstanding academics seem oblivious to
appearance or social norms.
5. Status and *roup Intera-tion
)nteraction is in$uenced by status
CighF*status people tend to be assertive
1tatus di'erence inhibit diversity of ideas B creativity
Lower*status members tend to be less active
8. Status Ine.uit)7
6hen ine-uity is perceived, it creates dise-uilibrium that results in
corrective behavior.
#he trappings of formal positions are also important elements in maintaining
e-uity. 0mployees e%pect what an individual has and receives to be
congruent with hisHher status. ,or e%ample7 pay, o/ce space, etc.
Groups generally agree within themselves on status criteria.
)ndividuals can fnd themselves in a con$ict situation when they move
between groups whose status criteria are di'erent or when they join groups
whose members have heterogeneous bac"grounds
8
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
;. 1tatus and -ulture$
a. +ultural di'erences a'ect status. ,or e%ample, the ,rench are highly
status conscious.
b. +ountries di'er on the criteria that create status7
a. 1tatus for Latin Americans and Asians tends to be derived from family
position and formal roles held in organiations.
b. )n the <nited 1tates and Australia, it tends to be bestowed more on
accomplishments.
4a"e sure you understand who and what holds status when interacting with
people from a di'erent culture than your own
,. Si9e
1. #he sie of a group a'ects the group!s overall behavior, but the e'ect depends
on the dependent variables7
1maller groups are faster at completing tas"s than are larger ones.
)f the group is engaged in problem solving, large groups consistently do
better.
Large groupsa doen or more membersare good for gaining diverse
input.
1maller groupsseven membersare better at doing something productive
with that input.
2. So-ial loa:ng is the tendency for individuals to e%pend less e'ort when wor"ing
collectively than when wor"ing individually.
A common stereotype about groups is that team spirit spurs individual e'ort
and enhances overall productivity.
)n the late 1>2Fs, a German psychologist named 4a% :ingelmann compared
the results of individual and group performance on a rope*pulling tas".
:ingelmann!s results showed that groups of three people e%erted a force
only two*and*a*half times the average individual performance. Groups of
eight collectively achieved less than four times the solo rate.
)ncreases in group sie are inversely related to individual performance.
:eplications of :ingelmann!s research generally support his fndings.
(. +auses of social loafng7
A belief that others in the group are not carrying their fair share.
#he dispersion of responsibility and the relationship between an individual!s
input and the group!s output is clouded.
#here will be a reduction in e/ciency where individuals thin" that their
contribution cannot be measured.
8. )mplications for 5M7
9
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
6here managers utilie collective wor" situations to enhance morale and
teamwor", they must also provide means by which individual e'orts can be
identifed.
)t is not consistent with collective societies where individuals are motivated
by in*group goals. #he +hinese and )sraelis actually performed better in a
group than when wor"ing alone.
9. 5ther conclusions about groups7
Groups with an odd number of members tend to be preferable.
Groups made up of fve or seven members do a pretty good job of e%ercising
the best elements of both small and large groups.
E. Cohesiveness
1. Groups di'er in their -ohesiveness, @the degree to which members are
attracted to each other and are motivated to stay in the group.A
2. +ohesiveness is important because it has been found to be related to the
group!s productivity. (See Exhiit !-;#.
(. #he relationship of cohesiveness and productivity depends on the performance*
related norms established by the group7
)f performance*related norms are high, a cohesive group will be more
productive.
)f cohesiveness is high and performance norms are low, productivity will be
low.
8. Cow to encourage group cohesiveness7
4a"e the group smaller.
0ncourage agreement with group goals.
)ncrease the time members spend together.
)ncrease the status of the group and the perceived di/culty of attaining
membership in the group.
1timulate competition with other groups.
Give rewards to the group rather than to individual members.
.hysically isolate the group.
Group 3ecision 4a"ing
A. *roup vs. the Individual
1. Strengths of group de-ision-making$
Groups generate more complete information and "nowledge.
#hey o'er increased diversity of views.
#his opens up the opportunity for more approaches and alternatives to be
considered.
#he evidence indicates that a group will almost always outperform even the
best individual.
10
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
Groups lead to increased acceptance of a solution.
2. 6eaknesses of group de-ision-making$
#hey are time consuming.
#here is a conformity pressure in groups.
Group discussion can be dominated by one or a few members.
Group decisions su'er from ambiguous responsibility.
(. E<e-tiveness and e=-ien-)$
6hether groups are more e'ective than individuals depends on the criteria
you use.
)n terms of accuracy, group decisions will tend to be more accurate.
5n the average, groups ma"e better*-uality decisions than individuals.
)f decision e'ectiveness is defned in terms of speed, individuals are superior.
)f creativity is important, groups tend to be more e'ective than individuals.
)f e'ectiveness means the degree of acceptance the fnal solution achieves,
groups are better.
8. )n terms of e/ciency, groups almost always stac" up as a poor second to the
individual decision ma"er. #he e%ceptions tend to be those instances where, to
achieve comparable -uantities of diverse input, the single decision ma"er must
spend a great deal of time reviewing fles and tal"ing to people.
9. Summar)$
Groups o'er an e%cellent vehicle for performing many of the steps in the
decision*ma"ing process.
#hey are a source of both breadth and depth of input for information
gathering.
6hen the fnal solution is agreed upon, there are more people in a group
decision to support and implement it.
Group decisions consume time, create internal con$icts, and generate
pressures toward conformity.
(. *roupthink and *roupshift
1. Groupthin" and groupshift are two by*products of group decision*ma"ing.
Mrie$y, the di'erences between the two are7
2. *roupthink is related to norms7

)t describes situations in which group pressures for conformity deter the
group from critically appraising unusual, minority, or unpopular views.
Groupthin" is a disease that attac"s many groups and can dramatically
hinder performance.
(. *roupshift
)t indicates that, in discussing a given set of alternatives and arriving at a
solution, group members tend to e%aggerate the initial positions that they
held. )n some situations, caution dominates, and there is a conservative shift.
11
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
#he evidence indicates that groups tend toward a ris"y shift. Let us loo" at
each of these phenomena in more detail.
C. *roupthink
1. #he phenomenon that occurs when group members become so enamored of
see"ing concurrence is that the norm for consensus overrides the realistic
appraisal of alternative courses of action and the full e%pression of deviant,
minority, or unpopular views.
2. )t is a deterioration in an individual!s mental e/ciency, reality testing, and
moral judgment as a result of group pressures.
(. 1ymptoms of Groupthin" include7
Group members rationalie any resistance to the assumptions they have
made.
4embers apply direct pressures on those who momentarily e%press doubts.
#hose members who hold di'ering points of view see" to avoid deviating
from group consensus by "eeping silent.
#here appears to be an illusion of unanimity.
8. )n studies of historic American foreign policy decisions, these symptoms were
found to prevail when government policy*ma"ing groups failed. 0%amples7
a. <nprepared ness at .earl Carbor in 1>81
b. #he <.1. invasion of &orth Oorea
c. #he May of .igs fasco
d. #he escalation of the Pietnam 6ar
e. #he +hallenger and +olumbia space shuttle disasters
f. #he failure of the main mirror on the Cubble telescope
9. Groupthin" appears to be closely aligned with the conclusions Asch drew from
his e%periments on the lone dissenter. #he results where those individuals who
hold a position di'erent from the majority are put under pressure to suppress or
change their true beliefs.
;. Groupthin" does not attac" all groups. )t occurs most often where there is a
clear group identity, where members hold a positive image of their group which
they want to protect, and where the group perceives a collective threat to this
positive image.
=. Cow to minimie groupthin"7
0ncourage group leaders to play an impartial role.
Appoint one group member to play the role of devil!s advocate.
<tilie e%ercises that stimulate active discussion of diverse alternatives
without threatening the group and intensifying identity protection.
12
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
,. *roupshift
1. )n some cases, the group decisions are more conservative than the individual
decisions. 4ore often, however, the shift is toward greater ris".
2. 6hat appears to happen in groups is that the discussion leads to a signifcant
shift in the positions of members toward a more e%treme position in the
direction in which they were already leaning before the discussion.
+onservatives become more cautious, and the more aggressive ta"e on more
ris".
(. #he groupshift can be viewed as actually a special case of groupthin". #he
decision of the group re$ects the dominant decision*ma"ing norm that develops
during the group!s discussion.
8. #he greater occurrence of the shift toward ris" has generated several
e%planations7
3iscussion creates familiariation among the members. As they become
more comfortable with each other, they also become more bold and daring.
4ost frst*world societies value ris". 6e admire individuals who are willing to
ta"e ris"s. Group discussion motivates members to show that they are at
least as willing as their peers to ta"e ris"s.
#he most plausible e%planation of the shift toward ris", however, seems to be
that the group di'uses responsibility.
Group decisions free any single member from accountability for the group!s
fnal choice.
9. )mplications of Groupshift7
:ecognie that group decisions e%aggerate the initial position of the
individual members.
#he shift has been shown more often to be toward greater ris".
E. *roup ,e-ision-Making Te-hni.ues
1. 4ost Group 3ecision 4a"ing #a"es .lace in )nteracting Groups
)n these groups, members meet face to face and rely on both verbal and
nonverbal interaction to communicate with each other.
)nteracting groups often censor themselves and pressure individual members
toward conformity of opinion.
Mrainstorming, the nominal group techni-ue, and electronic meetings have
been proposed as ways to reduce many of the problems inherent in the
traditional interacting group.
13
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight
2. (rainstorming$
)t is meant to overcome pressures for conformity in the interacting group
that retard the development of creative alternatives.
)n a typical brainstorming session, a half doen to a doen people sit around
a table.
#he process7
a. #he group leader states the problem clearly.
b. 4embers then @free*wheelA as many alternatives as they can in a given
length of time.
c. &o criticism is allowed, and all the alternatives are recorded for later
discussion and analysis.
d. 5ne idea stimulates others, and group members are encouraged to
@thin" the unusual.A
(. The nominal group te-hni.ue$

:estricts discussion or interpersonal communication during the decision*
ma"ing process
Group members are all physically present, but members operate
independently.
1pecifcally, a problem is presented, and then the following steps ta"e place7
a. 4embers meet as a group but, before any discussion ta"es place, each
member independently writes down his or her ideas on the problem.
b. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to the group.
0ach member ta"es his or her turn.
c. #he group now discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them.
d. 0ach group member silently and independently ran"*orders the ideas.
e. #he idea with the highest aggregate ran"ing determines the fnal
decision.
E. *roup ,e-ision-Making Te-hni.ues (-ont.#
#he chief advantage of the nominal group techni-ue is that it permits the
group to meet formally but does not restrict independent thin"ing, as does
the interacting group.
8. #he computer*assisted group or electronic meeting blends the nominal group
techni-ue with sophisticated computer technology.
<p to 9F people sit around a horseshoe*shaped table, empty e%cept for a
series of computer terminals.
)ssues are presented to participants, and they type their responses onto their
computer screen.
)ndividual comments, as well as aggregate votes, are displayed on a
projection screen.
#he major advantages of electronic meetings are anonymity, honesty, and
speed.
14
Robbins: Organizational Behavior Chapter Eight

15