Group Behaviour in Organisation

Discussion of the Topic

The topic indicates the group behaviour in the federal prison and the effectiveness in determining the enhancements of the productivity. It is to be indicated that the modernised world, the emergence of the group activities are significantly contributing the skilfulness in achieving the organisational goals (Clark et al. 2014). However, in the federal prison, the group is formed with the correctional officers, guards, and other staffs. The diversified cultural background sometimes is the reason behind the conflicts foreseen in the internal scenario (Hurwitz et al. 2015). The lack of cohesiveness is also one of the most significant reasons behind the group conflicts. The ineffective attributes of maintaining the responsibilities can affect the group productivity (Loucks, 2013). Therefore, the study will be evaluating the necessity of maintaining the group behaviour to determine the achievement of the organisational objectives. The proper behaviour is also effective enough for the correctional purposes of the prisoners.

Role Conflicts within Groups

It is to be noted that both the formal and informal goals usually depend on the role performance and the role expectations of the personnel in federal prison (Skarbek, 2012). Furthermore, it can be stated that the behaviour even affects the positions occupied by the personnel in an organisation. The custody prisons set their goal to provide the proper training to the community for facilitating the security and control over the inmates. The correctional officer has to maintain the security and orders since the custody ideology is mainly based on the containment of the inmates (Amato, 2012). The orders and the security are associated in the specified group or within a delimited area. The officers in the groups are forced to maintain order, enforce rules, and retain custody. The maintenance of the responsibilities determines the procedures and systematic structure of the federal prison. Every prison includes the modicum of custody, which is associated with the correctional facilities. Therefore, in some of the cases, the dual emphasis in the custody often gives rise to some recognisable conflicts. According to Appelbaum et al. (2014), the attempt of fulfilling the conflicting role by an individual can be the reason behind the role conflict in the federal prison. On the contrary, it can be stated that the existence of both the treatment of the goals and custody is considered as the potential source of role conflicts among the staffs in American Prison. The staffs associated in the custody works need to overlook the violations taking place within the organisation and need to get the control over the inmates. In considering such aspect Duffee commented, “In the anomic position of working for a goal, which is negatively defined as the absence of punishment and is manifested by no acceptably measured result” (Jwalkonline.org, 2016). The staffs are mainly appointed to maintain the lenient rules applied in the group in federal prison.  Therefore, the emergence of the role conflict is much foreseen and can create the recognisable impacts as well.

Communication Problems among group members

The staffs or the guards in the federal prison usually confront the potential violent situations in the inmates of the federal prisons (Stewart et al. 2015). It is to be noted that the staffs have to maintain the main responsibilities of managing the inmates even at their worst behaviours towards them. The maintenance of such duty includes the counselling the inmates and escorting them throughout the prison by keeping the concentration on the policies and regulations applied in the prison. The correctional officers are even inspecting the inmate’s living areas to revive the illegal items (Richmond, 2014). Hence, these officers have to face the different situations with proper cautions. When the correctional officer will notice the aggressive behaviour of the inmates, they need to respond the prisoners back in accordance with the situations. The sign of the trigger and the body language are used for making the prisoners aware of their aggressiveness or the dangerous behaviour. The behavioural traits are the signs of the extreme attributes of the prisoners that the correctional officers or the staffs have to deal in managing the inmates (Koopmans & Schaeffer, 2015). It is to be noted that during such behaviour, the staffs are sometimes feeling uncomfortable and they usually take such aggressiveness as threats. If any of the inmates recognise the situation, it is required to stay calm before the situation escalates. In such cases, it is necessary to control such situations by staying calm. The maintenance of such situations is significant enough in avoiding the miscommunications.

Lack of cohesiveness in groups with diverse members 

Harris (2014) pointed out that the term ‘cohesiveness’ refers the example of the complex forces, which determines the group identity more specifically. The maintenance of the cohesiveness among the groups is considered as one of the most significant ways to enhance the potentiality of the group behaviour. In the federal prison, the members are usually from the different cultural background and this signifies the association of the diversified nature in the group (Ngo et al. 2013). In the federal prison, both the guards and the correctional officers belong to the diversified cultural aspects. In fact, they have to deal with the aggressiveness of the prisoners. Hence, the presence of the cohesiveness is necessary. The alignment between the group members includes the prerequisites that contributes the cohesions and brings the sense belonging and common identity (Losh, 2015). The existence of the ethnic inequalities and the social exclusion are eliminating the cohesiveness from the group bonding (Glisson et al. 2012). In fact, due to lack of cohesiveness in the group, the emergence of the racist victimizations and discriminations is also prominently seen. It is to be noted that the lack of cohesiveness is considered as the driving force for the local, regional, class-based, and nationality based discriminations more specifically (Hurwitz et al. 2015). In keeping the focus on such issues, the group members have to face the difficulties in understanding and identify the dynamics in the prison social system (Koopmans & Schaeffer, 2015). The problematic attributes foreseen in such atmosphere can be the reason behind the decreasing level of the productivity.

Excessive Intergroup Conflict

As referred by Roth & Skarbek (2014), the intergroup conflicts determine the collective disagreement or the incompatibility between two or more divisions, subsystems, and departments. The intergroup conflicts create the recognisable linking between the task, information, and resources. It is to be indicated that despite the approval received from Eighth Amendment in 1971, the information regarding the excessive violence in American prisons is much specified. The act eliminated the ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment provided to the prisoners (Van der Laan & Eichelsheim, 2013). However, the breaching of such laws has been much prominent in the federal prisons of United States. The inmates along with the federal authorities have been complaining regarding such cruel punishments, which have been widespread in a very significant manner (Ngo et al. 2013). In the year of 2005, the Commissions on Safety and Abuse in Prisons informed about the allegations of mistreating almost 16,000 prisoners. The misconduct indicates both the physical and sexual assaults, which brought to the notice of Inspectors (Hurwitz et al. 2015). It has been indicated that the excessive level of violence is not only foreseen in the state prison, the country jails even have to face such situations. The punishments cause the result of the physical sufferings faced by the inmates in the prison. In the year of 2007, one of the inmates was beaten and handcuffed by a group of guards. Some of the inmates even get the mental disorders due to such ill treatment. Such of this intergroup conflict is affecting the group productivity in a very significant manner.

Recommendations

The federal inmates usually face the emotional, physical, and psychological prison environment, which is usually defining the attitudes and beliefs held by the criminal justice system (Clark et al. 2014). The internal conflict foreseen among the group members affects the productivity in a very prominent manner. While the group productivity facilitates the determination of achieving the organisational objectives, the internal conflicts affect the situations more significantly. The beliefs and attitudes in prior to provide the punishments to the inmates can sometimes be inconsistence and complex. The group conflicts even create impact on the psychological aspects of the members. The guards and the correctional officers have to deal with the aggressive behaviours of the inmates, which may create some dangerous situations. Hence, if the staffs are mentally being instable of handling such situations, it would affect them in a very significant manner.

The lack of cohesiveness is also affecting the group productivity much prominently. The maintenance of the group cohesiveness determines the identifications of the group. It has been seen the excessive internal violence is affecting the reputation of the federal prison and the federal authority has to question the staffs about such negligence. The role conflict among the correctional officers is thus concentrating on the empirical investigations. The positions of the staffs in the security prison needs to be skilled in communicational aspects. The presence of the communicational transparency is effective enough in adding the value to the group productivity. The increasing level of the violence in treating the inmates is affecting the internal scenario more specifically. Hence, it is important to initiate the proper training session for the group members. If the group members are properly trained to treat the inmates in their aggressiveness, it would be beneficial for the group productivity.

The group behaviour is much facilitated by the training session provided by the practitioners or the higher authority in the federal prison. The staffs are trained to respond in accordance to the aggressive attitude of the prisoners. The correctional officers along with the other staffs have to perform their responsibilities in treating the inmates. Therefore, the group training is essential for maintaining the efficiency in the group behaviour of the federal prison.

Conclusion

The study reflects the significance of group behaviour in the federal prison. It is to be indicated that the federal prison includes the correctional officers along with the other staffs who usually deal with the inmates. Sometimes the aggressiveness of the inmates creates the effective scenario that leads the correctional officers in acquiring the aggressive behaviour. In such situations, it is important for the correctional officers and the staffs to control their anger by taking deep breaths and possible practices. In fact, they need to avoid such aggressive behaviour to tackle the situation from being dangerous. The role of conflict and the communicational problem among the members are also much significant in considering the facilitations in the group behaviour. The excessive intergroup conflicts are thus affecting the group behaviour more significantly. The practitioners or the authority may even provide the correctional officers and the other staffs the lesson about treating the inmates. The recognition of their behaviour is important and they need to respond them back accordingly. The decreasing level of the violence on the inmates in the prison is essential. Hence, the entire study concludes with the justified ways of adding the efficiency in the group behaviour in federal prison.

References

Amato, F. J. (2012). The relationship of violence to gender role conflict and conformity to masculine norms in a forensic sample. The Journal of Men's Studies, 20(3), 187-208.

Appelbaum, K. L., Hickey, J. M., & Packer, I. (2014). The role of correctional officers in multidisciplinary mental health care in prisons. Psychiatric Services.

Clark, B. C., Thorne, C. B., Hendricks, P. S., Sharp, C., Clark, S. K., & Cropsey, K. L. (2014). Individuals in the criminal justice system show differences in cooperative behaviour: Implications from cooperative games.Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health.

Glisson, C. A., Dulmus, C. N., & Sowers, K. M. (2012). Social work practice with groups, communities, and organizations: Evidence-based assessments and interventions. John Wiley & Sons.

Harris, M. S. (2014). Group Therapy at a Prison for Women: A Therapist's Perspective. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 84(1), 40-54.

Hurwitz, J., Peffley, M., & Mondak, J. (2015). Linked Fate and Outgroup Perceptions Blacks, Latinos, and the US Criminal Justice System. Political Research Quarterly,.

Koopmans, R., & Schaeffer, M. (2015). Relational Diversity and Neighbourhood Cohesion. Unpacking Variety, Balance and In-Group Size.Social Science Research.

Losh, S. (2015). Group Behavior in Organization, pp.22-135.

Loucks, N. (2013). Bullying behaviour among women in prison. Bullying among Prisoners, 27.

Ngo, H. V., Rossiter, M. J., & Stewart, C. (2013). Understanding risk and protective factors associated with criminal involvement in a multicultural society. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 4(1), 54-71.

Richmond, K. M. (2014). The impact of federal prison industries employment on the recidivism outcomes of female inmates. Justice Quarterly, 31(4), 719-745.

Roth, M. G., & Skarbek, D. (2014). Prison Gangs and the Community Responsibility System. Review of Behavioral Economics, 1(3), 223-243.

Skarbek, D. (2012). Prison gangs, norms, and organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(1), 96-109.

Stewart, L. A., Wilton, G., & Sapers, J. (2015). Offenders with Cognitive Deficits in a Canadian Prison Population: Prevalence, Profile, and Outcomes. International journal of law and psychiatry.

Van der Laan, A., & Eichelsheim, V. (2013). Juvenile adaptation to imprisonment: Feelings of safety, autonomy and well-being, and behaviour in prison. European Journal of Criminology, 10(4), 424-443.

Websites

Bop.gov, (2016). USP Allenwood. [online] Available at: https://www.bop.gov/locations/institutions/alp/ [Accessed 18 Jan. 2016].

Jwalkonline.org, (2016). Role conflict in correctional institutions [online] Available at: https://www.jwalkonline.org/docs/Grad%20Classes/Survey/articles/psyclimate/not%20used/role%20conflict%20in%20correctional.pdf [Accessed 18 Jan. 2016].