This is from the book “Why Great Leaders Don’t Take No For an Answer”
[B]In-Groups Versus Out-Groups[/B]
As people work together in the decision process, they have a natural tendency to categorize other members of the groups in which they interact. They classify some people as similar to them (the in-group) and others as quite different, based on a few salient demographic characteristics or professional attributes (the out-group). [B]For instance, an engineer may distinguish those group members with similar functional backgrounds from individuals who have spent their careers working in finance or marketing. In general, people tend to perceive in-group members in a positive light and out-group members in a negative light. These perceptions shape the way that individuals interact with one another.[/B] Highly divisive categorization processes—those circumstances in which people draw sharp distinctions between in-groups and out-groups—can diminish social interaction among group members, impede information flows, and foster interpersonal tensions.
Individuals also appraise other group members in terms of personal attributes such as intelligence, integrity, and conscientiousness. Unfortunately, a person’s self-appraisal often does not match the view that others have. An individual may see himself as highly trustworthy, whereas others have serious doubts about whether he is reliable and dependable. When individuals tend to see themselves in a manner consistent with others’ views and perceptions, groups perform more effectively. If many perceptual disconnects exist within a group, people find it difficult to interact constructively. It becomes difficult to manage disputes and lead deliberations smoothly.[SUP]57[/SUP]
The formation of “in-groups” vs “out-groups” is unavoidable with a big (20 + people) crew.
Common group arrangement aboard ship are
. [Capt / CE] [Mates] [A/E] [unlicensed in various ways]
[Capt and Mates] [C/E and A/E] [unlicensed eng / unlicensed deck in var way]
[Capt and boatswain] or similar
The trick is to manage how groups form. The one big happy family is not going to happen and is BS anyway because it is actually this:
[Capt] [the rest of the crew in various random forms]
The optimum arrangement is for the top group:
[Capt / C/E / C/M / 1 A/E]
These top four need have a solid understanding of what’s going on aboard the vessel. The crew needs to understand these top four are running the show within the established traditional hierarchy.
The C/M and 1 A/E are one that actually need to “get it done”
With this arrangement the 1 A/E along with the C/E are firmly “in the loop” with regards to ship operations. and that both have direct role (but not the final say) in the decision making process. Likewise Capt and mate should have a good grasp on eng dept workload, technical limitations etc.