All Jobs Should Be Designed Around Groups
Point
Groups, not individuals, are the ideal building blocks for an organization. There are several reasons for designing all jobs around groups. First, in general, groups make better decisions than the average individual acting alone.
Second, with the growth in technology, society is becoming more intertwined. Look at the growth of social networking media such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. People are connected anyway, so why not design work in the same way?
Third, small groups are good for people. They can satisfy social needs and provide support for employees in times of stress and crisis. Evidence indicates that social support—both when they provide it and when they receive it—makes people happier and even allows them to live longer.
Fourth, groups are very effective tools for implementation for decisions. Groups gain commitment from their members so that group decisions are likely to be willingly and more successfully carried out.
Fifth, groups can control and discipline individual members in ways that are often extremely difficult through impersonal quasilegal disciplinary systems. Group norms are powerful control devices.
Sixth, groups are a means by which large organizations can fend off many of the negative effects of increased size. Groups help prevent communication lines from growing too long, the hierarchy from growing too steep, and individuals from getting lost in the crowd.
The rapid growth of team-based organizations in recent years suggests that we may well be on our way toward a day when almost all jobs are designed around groups.

CounterPoint

Capitalistic countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom value the individual. Designing jobs around groups is inconsistent with the economic values of these countries. Moreover, as capitalism and