Are small groups relevant to the real world? Certainly the contemporary image of corporate America—particularly corporate giants like Microsoft and General Motors—is that work groups get the job done. But for those of us who work in small businesses with only a handful of employees, how can we use small groups when our staff may itself be a small group?
Allison McLean (2001) reports on the use of peer groups by owners of small printing businesses across the United States. Peer groups vary in size; however, the largest peer group coordinated by the Printing Executive Network (PEN) is about 15 people. Peer groups have been used in the small printing industry for nearly 20 years and there are currently about 11 active groups working under the auspices of the PEN and several others operating independently. Groups are typically comprised of people from businesses with similar financial resources.
Each group has its own norms for meetings. For example, some groups combine social and business activities by meeting in the city of one of the group members, playing golf, and spending two days discussing strategies for marketing and business operations. Other groups meet for shorter durations and limit their activities to discussing business matters. Thus, some peer groups have characteristics of both task-oriented and relationship-oriented groups; others are primarily task-oriented groups. Additionally, some groups bring in outside facilitators, whereas others structure their own meetings.
Two rules guide the behaviors of peer groups. First, no two members of any peer group can be in direct competition with one another. Because of this rule, members of the group can freely give advice without worrying that they will be placed at a competitive disadvantage. Second, peer groups must “hold feet to the fire.” McLean explains that the groups act as a sort of “Board of Directors” for individual firms. If the group gives a member suggestions for improvement, the owner of the firm must demonstrate progress toward meeting those suggestions at the next meeting. The groups provide a sense of external accountability not normally felt in small-business environments. To further create this sense of accountability, members normally share financial data for their individual firms with other members of the group.
Although the use of peer groups does pose some expense—mainly for travel—for individual firms, owners acknowledge that receiving recommendations from objective peers more than makes up for any financial loss. In addition, peer groups can provide each other with quick advice or just encouragement. Some groups even pool resources to create advertising campaigns that can be used by each business—thus resulting in a higher quality campaign without higher cost to each firm.
All of the professionals interviewed by McLean indirectly point to the importance of synergy, or the collaborative fit between members of the group. John Stewart, a coordinator for several peer groups, reported that as many as 10 percent to 15 percent of new members of a group elect or are asked to resign their membership within the first four meetings because they are unable to effectively collaborate with other members. Those collaborators who are able to work effectively with the group quickly see advantages from the synergy and collaboration.
Although the term “work groups” typically conjures up images of large corporations, peer groups in the printing industry illustrate how small businesses can also capitalize on the benefits of groups.
