Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior - Soltanieh ...

316 GERARDO A. OKHUYSEN AND BETH A. BECHKY
they hasten the emergence of conflict and so accelerate the entire group process. Rather
than waiting or hoping that conflict will emerge, group members simply create that conflict.
Less obviously, these tactics often give group members confidence that they are not
overlooking key information and perspectives. Armed with such confi dence, group members
are likely to have a faster process. That confidence is especially crucial in situations
where the barriers to group execution are as much emotional (i.e. fear of the unknown) as
they are cognitive. More obviously, these tactics clearly improve group process by helping
group members to come up with more varied viewpoints on their actions. They encourage
group members to think over time, to reverse their usual path of thinking, and to
assume new lenses for viewing the activities of the group. Through all of these tactics,
group members are likely to develop a process that is more highly confl ictual.
Finally, the combination of a diverse group, multiple alternatives, and especially framebreaking
heuristics and role structures affects group process by legitimating confl ict. This
helps group members to get along even as they disagree. For instance, when crew members
on film sets voice their concerns about task accomplishments to other group members, they
do so politely, often after first thanking their colleagues for things they are doing right
(Bechky, 2006 ). These tactics normalize conflict by encouraging group members to frame
conflict as less centered on personal differences and more centered on problem solving.
That is, they put a cooperative, not competitive, perspective on the group process. For
example, the use of a devil ’s advocate allows the group to formalize task conflict and use
it as part of its work process. The artificial addition of such task conflict into the group
allows members to capitalize on the group ’s problem - solving advantages, while at the
same time providing legitimacy for the emergence of conflict within the group. The legitimacy
of conflict that is afforded group members through the adoption of such tactics
contributes to the prevention of premature and even false consensus.
PACING THE PROCESS
One of the striking features of the literature on group process is the lack of attention to
time. Of course, there are some exceptions (including those noted below), but very often
authors ignore or misunderstand time. Yet, in the world of real groups, time is critical. In
fact, with the emergence of the Internet, the convergence of consumer electronics with
computing and telecommunications, and the globalization of work, attention to time is
becoming crucial for many groups. In places like Silicon Valley, quips like “ snooze, you
lose ” or “ the worst decision is no decision at all ” underscore the importance of time. For
other groups, such as police crisis teams, the timing of action is critical: acting too soon
or not soon enough are both problematic. For film crews, pacing is central to maintaining
control over the work. Pacing keeps group members moving forward, even as it gives them
opportunities to adjust to unforeseen problems and unexpected opportunities, towards the
completion of their work.
Setting the pace: adopting a rhythm of action
One way to drive the pace of the group is simply by developing a natural rhythm of action.
For example, Eisenhardt ( 1999 ) describes how top management teams develop a sense