performance chapter 9. group performance increasing importance in today’s workplace teams/groups...
TRANSCRIPT
PERFORMANCE
Chapter 9
Group Performance
Increasing importance in today’s workplace Teams/Groups are more common now Global competition will require more effort
from employees Downsizing requires adaptability & extra
effort Resources may be scarce
Adaptive Group Performance
Beneficial due to changing nature of work Changing technologies alter work tasks Mergers, downsizing, & corporate
restructuring – dealing with uncertain conditions
Globalization & Diversity - working in different cultures
Social Facilitation
Social facilitation: improvement in performance in the presence of others (both audience and coaction)
Triplett’s (1898) early studies on cyclists – performed better when racing against others than being timed alone against others than being timed alone
Coaction – performing a task in the presence of one or more other individuals who are performing a similar activity
Zajonc’s motivational analysis of social facilitation (1965)– Dominant Responses vs. Nondominant
Responses
Social Facilitation (cont)
Presence of
others
Dominantresponses
increase andnondominant
responsesdecrease
If task requiresdominant response
If task requiresnondominant
response
Socialinterference
Social facilitation
Zajonc’s motivational analysis of social facilitation (1965)– Social Facilitation occurs on simple tasks that
require dominant responses– Social Impairment occurs for complex tasks that
require nondominant responses
Examples:– Making speeches– Getting dressed in familiar & unfamiliar clothes– Playing games
Social Facilitation (cont)
Theories of Social Facilitation
Zajonc’s Drive Process: Zajonc suggests compresence (responding to the presence of others) leads to increased readiness and arousal (psychologically & physiologically)
Motivational Processes: Cotrell’s evaluation apprehension theory (also, self-presentation theory): when working in the presence of others a general concern of how others are evaluation them, and this apprehension facilitates their performance on simple, well learned tasks
Theories of Social Facilitation
Cognitive Processes: distraction-conflict theory when people are in the presence of others their attention is divided by the other people and the task
This attentional conflict increases motivation and so it facilitates performance on simple, well learned tasks
Recall is poorer when original stimulus was presented in the presence of others
Alone or with Others ?
Prejudice as a dominant response Electronic performance monitoring Study groups
Group Productivity
Social Loafing – the reduction of individual effort when people work in groups compared to when they work alone
Productivity losses in groups Steiner’s law of group productivity Actual productivity = Potential productivity – losses
owing to faulty process
The Ringelmann Effect People become less productive when they work
with others Loss increases as group become larger
Group Productivity
The Ringelmann Effect People become less productive when they
work with others Loss increases as group become larger
Causes of Loss Coordination problems Reduction of effort
100
200
300
400
500
600
PotentialProductivity
Pseudogroups
Actual groups
Alone Dyads6-person
groups
Social Loafing
Social loafing depends on a number of group-level factors, including: Identifiability Free-riding Goals
Cures for Social Loafing
Involvement– exciting, challenging, involving tasks limit loafing– Karau and William's (1993) collective effort
model, or CEM – social compensation: involved members work
harder to compensate for others Identification with the group: Social identity
Building an Effective Team
Steiner’s social combination theory predicts productivity depends on Group composition: Who is in the group, how
do they fit together? The group’s task: What must the group do to
reach its goals?
Building an Effective Team
Group composition Members’ knowledge, skills, abilities, or KSAs
outperform less skilled groups “the best individuals make the best teams”
Group Diversity may outperform less diverse groups b/c their wide range of talents & traits enhances their cognitive flexibility – i.e., creativity, alternatives, solutions
Men and women in performance groups (solo status)
Building an Effective Team
Steiner’s taxonomy of tasks and task demands
Distinguishes between the types of tasks groups perform based on how members’ inputs are combined
Task Demands – the effect that a problem or task’s features, including its divisibility and difficulty, have on the procedures the group can use to complete the task
Asks three basic questions…. Divisibility, Quantity vs. Quality, Interdependence
Task Demands
Question Task Type
Qualities Examples
Can the task be broken down into subtasks?
Divisible Subcomponents can be identified and assigned to specific members
Playing a football game Building a house Preparing a six- course meal
Unitary The task does not have subcomponents
Pulling on a rope Reading a book Solving a math problem
Quantity vs. Quality
Is quantity produced more important than quality of performance ?
Maximizing
Quantity:
The more produced the better the performance
Generating many ideas Lifting a great weight Scoring the most goals
Optimizing
Quality:
A correct or optimal solution is needed
Developing the best answer Solving a math problem
Interdependence
How are individual inputs combined to yield a group product ?
Additive Individual inputs are added together
Pulling a rope Shoveling snow
Compensatory Decision is made by averaging together individual decisions
Estimating a pig’s weight by asking 3 people to guess & averaging their guesses Averaging ratings of job applicants
Disjunctive Group selects one solution or product from a pool of members’ solutions or products
Picking one person’s answer to a math problem to be the group’s answer Letting one art project represent the entire school
Conjunctive All group members must contribute to the product for it to be completed
Climbing a mountain Eating a meal as a group
Discretionary Group decides how individual inputs relate to group product
Deciding to shovel snow together Choosing to vote on the best answer to a problem
Types of Tasks
Additive Task – a task or project that a group can complete by cumulative combining of members’ input
Compensatory Task – a task or project that a group can complete by averaging together individual members’ solutions or recommendations
Groups outperform individuals on additive tasks and compensatory tasks.
Types of Tasks
Disjunctive Task – a task or project that is completed when a single solution, decision, or recommendation is adopted by the group
Groups perform well on disjunctive tasks if the group includes at least one individual who knows the correct solution (truth-wins rule on Eureka problems)
Groups rarely perform better than the best member (synergy, or an assembly bonus effect)
Types of Tasks
Conjunctive Task – a task that can be completed successfully only if all group members contribute
Groups perform poorly on conjunctive tasks unless less skilled members increase their efforts (the Köhler Effect) or the task can be subdivided.
Köhler Effect – an increase in performance by groups working on conjunctive tasks that require persistence but little coordination of effort and is likely due to the increase effort expended by the less capable members.
The effectiveness of groups working on discretionary tasks covaries with the method chosen to combine individuals’ inputs (see Table 9-3).
Brainstorming
Brainstorming rules Be expressive Postpone evaluation Seek quantity Piggyback ideas
Brainstorming…
Brainstorming groups are not as creative as nominal groups due to Social loafing Production blocking Social matching Illusion of productivity.
Other methods: brainwriting, synectics, the nominal‑group technique (NGT), and electronic brainstorming (EBS), offer advantages over traditional brainstorming.