2. Psychological compatibility of group members

In the process of joint activities, members of a small group need to make contact with each other to transfer information and coordinate their efforts. The level of such coordination fully determines the productivity of the group, no matter what type of activity it does. In turn, this level is a value derived from a varying degree of psychological compatibility of group members. What is psychological compatibility?

In a very brief way, this concept can be defined as the ability of group members to work together, based on their optimal combination. Compatibility is due to both the similarity of some properties of group members, and the difference in their other properties. As a result, this leads to the complementarity of people in a joint activity, so that this group represents a certain integrity.

We have already noted that any real group is not simply the sum of its constituent individuals. Therefore, an assessment of the group's activities should be given in view of the advanced F.D. Gorbov and MA Novikov principle of integrativity, i.e. view of the group as a single inseparably connected organism (Gorbov and Novikov, 1963).

Researchers studying the problems of psychological compatibility both here and abroad focus on such groups that have to perform their tasks in conditions of relative isolation from the social environment (cosmonauts, polar explorers, members of various expeditions). However, the role of groups with psychologically compatible people is important in all areas of joint activity, without exception. The presence of the psychological compatibility of the group members contributes to their better response and, as a result, greater labor efficiency. In accordance with the research data N.N. Obozova, we note the following criteria for assessing compatibility and triggeredness: 1) performance results; 2) emotional and energy costs of its participants; 3) their satisfaction with this activity (Obozov, 1979).

There are two main types of psychological compatibility: psycho-physiological and socio-psychological. In the first case, it implies a certain similarity of the psycho-physiological characteristics of people and on this basis the consistency of their emotional and behavioral reactions, synchronization of the rate of joint activity. In the second case, this refers to the effect of the optimal combination of the types of behavior of people in a group, the community of their social attitudes, needs and interests, value orientations.

It should be borne in mind that not every type of joint activity requires psycho-physiological compatibility of group members. Let us take, for example, the staff of a university department, each of whom performs his work alone: ​​he lectures, conducts seminars, takes examinations and tests, manages the scientific work of graduate students and students, etc. In this case, in order for the activity of the department as a whole to be successful, only the socio-psychological aspect of compatibility matters. If we turn to conveyor production, we will see that effective work here is impossible without the presence of the psycho-physiological compatibility of the members of the brigade. During in-line work, each person must perform his movements at a certain pace, and clear coordination of human actions is necessary. If the members of the conveyor team are also compatible in the socio-psychological terms, it is even more conducive to its successful work.

In modern conditions (in the areas of labor, sports) there are a number of activities that require both psycho-physiological and socio-psychological compatibility. Take, for example, the group work of operators in automated control systems. The so-called homeostatic technique proposed by F.D. Gorbov and his staff. Their research has shown that taking into account the requirements of psychological compatibility contributes to increasing the productivity and satisfaction of the subjects in experimental groups.

As an example of using this technique, we refer to the work carried out in the 1960s. in the laboratory of social psychology of the Leningrad (St. Petersburg) State University N.V. Golubeva and M.I. Ivanyuk. The installation "homeostat" is a device with which you can simulate group interdependent activity of people in the process of solving a problem. This device includes three or four identical devices, each of which has a dial gauge and a control handle. In front of these devices are the subjects (respectively, three or four people). Their common task is to set the arrows of all instruments in the position set by the experimenter. At the same time, the devices are interconnected in such a way that if one of the members of the experimental group manipulates the handle by itself, ignoring the actions of the others, the task cannot be solved.

How did the subjects behave? Observations have shown that four types of communicative behavior can be distinguished:

1. people aspiring to leadership, who can solve a problem, only subordinating to themselves other members of the group;
2. individualists trying to solve the problem alone;
3. adapting to the group, easily submitting to the orders of other members;
4. collectivists who try to solve the problem by joint efforts; they not only accept the offers of other members of the group, but also take the initiative themselves.

Experiments also showed that not every group was able to successfully solve the problem. For example, when a person striving for leadership could not force others to follow his orders, he often refused to participate in the experiment, and if he did, he now behaved very passively. If the group consisted mainly of individualists, then each of them sought to act separately from the others, in itself. In short, only certain combinations of different types of behavior were successful.

What was the best combination? In the experiments described, those groups were the fastest to solve their task, the members of which were quite active and exchanged information with each other, acting collectively. Interestingly, in experiments on a simpler homeostatic device, where only one of the three members of the group had an understanding of the task, the following combination also demonstrated effective work: one member of the group is active and the other two fully obey him (Golubeva and Ivanyuk, 1966). Although these experiments were conducted in the laboratory, the data obtained are directly related to the conditions of activity of various groups.

According to Obozov, an important circumstance determining relations and relations between people in a joint activity is the homogeneity / heterogeneity of the group (degree of similarity / contrast of the likely participants in the interaction) by the very different parameters (Kuzmin and Semenov, 1979).

The first level of homogeneity / heterogeneity of a group is the ratio of their individual (natural), personal and socio-psychological parameters (temperament, intellect, character, motivation, interests, value orientations, world outlook).

The second level of homogeneity / heterogeneity of a group is the ratio (similarity / difference) of their opinions, assessments, attitudes towards themselves, their partner, other people, and the objective world. This level is divided into two types (stages): primary (or baseline) and secondary (or effective). The primary homogeneity sub-level is the initial data (prior to the beginning of the interaction of the group members) the ratio of opinions, assessments (about the world of objects and about their own kind) and relations (to the world of objects and their own kind). The secondary uniformity sublayer is a ratio (similarity / difference) of opinions, assessments, and relations as a result of interaction between group members.

The first level of homogeneity / heterogeneity of the group is involved in the regulation of joint activities and interpersonal relationships of people. However, its regulatory role may be little recognized by members of the group. This does not mean, according to Obozov, that the partners do not see real similarities or differences between themselves. The similarity or difference (physical, behavioral) is so obvious that people do not attach much importance to either, considering it to be taken for granted.

The situation is different with the homogeneity / heterogeneity of the second level. The initial, initial correlation of opinions, assessments and relations in a group characterizes the degree of unity of views of its members and expresses the similarity / difference of interests, value orientations and personal attitudes. At this stage, the partners are not only aware of the similarities / differences in their opinions, assessments and relationships, but also begin to understand its importance for joint activities.

The secondary sublevel of homogeneity, being a consequence of the interaction of opinions, assessments and attitudes of group members, is governed by such psychological mechanisms as imitation, conformity, suggestion. The degree of positive variability of opinions, assessments and attitudes is one of the main indicators of group cohesion. Due to variability, the secondary sublayer of homogeneity / heterogeneity of opinions, assessments and relations is transformed.

In conclusion, Obozov concludes that various systems of factors are involved in the regulation of group activities:

1. non-group (physical and social);
2. intragroup (norms, interpersonal relations);
3. extrapersonal (homogeneity / heterogeneity in individual psychological parameters);
4. intrapersonal (social and psychological characteristics of group members - their opinions, assessments and attitudes).

So, studies show that psychological compatibility in groups is formed due to the action of various factors. The degree of such compatibility of members of the same group may be different at different stages of its life due to the dynamics of interpersonal relations. Acquisition of groups according to the requirements of psychological compatibility contributes to an increase in their productivity and satisfaction with their activities.