10
Performance
People join with others in groups to
get things done. Groups are the
worlds workers, protectors, builders,
decision makers, and problem solvers.
When individuals combine their
talents and energies in groups, they
accomplish goals that would
overwhelm individuals. People
working collectively inevitably
encounter problems coordinating their
efforts and maximizing effort, but
groups are the crucible for creativity.
10
What processes promote group
performance, and what processes
inhibit it?
Do people work as hard when in
groups as they do when working by
themselves?
When do people give their all when
working in a group?
When do groups outperform
individuals?
What steps can be taken to
encourage creativity in groups?
Working in Social Social Groups vs. Group
Groups Facilitation Loafing Individuals Creativity

Groups Performance The Additive

with a in the Ringelmann Tasks Brain-
Purpose Presence of Effect storming
Others Compensa-
When to tory Tasks
Causes and Improving
Work in
Why Does Cures Brain-
Groups Disjunctive
Social Tasks storming
Facilitation Collective
The Process Occur? Effort Conjunctive
Model of Model Tasks Alternatives
Productivity
Conclusions Discretion-
and ary Tasks
Applications
Process
Gains in
Groups
Working in
Groups

What happens when

Groups
people with
join a others
with
Purpose
on the most simple of
tasks?

DoWhen
manytohands
Workmake
lightinthe
Groups
work?

Are people prone to

freeThe
ride?
Process
Model of
Productivity
Are we better (smarter,
more clever, more
creative) together?
 Groups The tasks groups complete are
with a numerous and varied.
Purpose

McGraths task circumplex

model distinguishes
between generating,
choosing, negotiating, and
executing tasks. These
tasks differ along two
dimensions: conceptual-
behavioral and
cooperation-conflict.
When to Work
in Groups

Collective Intelligence When Groups?

Groups working on many How difficult is the

different types of tasks
performed better when: task?
They included more How complex is the
women task?
Members where higher How important is the
in social sensitivity task?
Members contributed at
relatively equal rates to How monotonous/dull
the task is the task?
 Process loss:
Steiners Reduction in Steiners Law
Theory of performance of Productivity
Process and effectiveness or
AP = PP PL
Productivity efficiency caused by
actions, operations, Actual productivity
or dynamics that is equal to Potential
Productivity Less
Ivan Steiner (1972), in prevent the group Process Loss
his classic work Group
Process and
from reaching its full
Productivity, drew on potential, including
the concept of process reduced effort, faulty
loss to predict when
groups will perform group processes,
well or poorly. coordination
problems, and
ineffective leadership.
Working in Social Social Groups vs. Group
Groups Facilitation Loafing Social
IndividualsFacilitation
Creativity

Groups Performance
with a Social
in thefacilitation: improvement in
Purpose performance
Presence of in the presence of others (both
When to Others and coaction)
audience
Work in
Groups Why Does
Social
Tripletts
Facilitation(1898) early study of the influence of
The Process other people on performance of simple tasks
Occur?
Model of
Productivity
Conclusions
and
Applications
Performance
in the Zajoncs motivational analysis of
Presence of social facilitation (1965)
Others

Social facilitation occurs Social interference

on simple tasks that occurs for complex
require dominant tasks that require
responses nondominant responses

Task requires Social

Dominant Performance
dominant facilitation
responses gain
responses
Presence increase and
of others nondominant
responses Task requires Performance
decrease Social
nondominant loss
interference
responses
 Empirical Examples:
Performance in the
Presence of Others Zajoncs Cockroach
Study

140
Speed in
seconds 120
100
80
Coacting
60 Alone
40
20
0
Simple Complex

Type of Maze
Performance in the Markus (1978): Donning
Presence of Others familiar and unfamiliar garb

40
35
30
25 Alone
Seconds

20 Watched
15 Present
10
5
0
Familiar Unfamiliar

Type of Task
Why Does
Social Theories of social facilitation
Facilitation
Occur?

Two types of responses in

performance settings
Challenge response
Threat response
Why Does
Social Theories of social facilitation
Facilitation
Occur?
Why Does
Social Theories of social facilitation
Facilitation
Occur?

Harkin tested his

mere-effort model
using the Remote
Associates Test Star
(RAT) Glass
Stamp
Carpet
High
Why Does
Social Theories of social facilitation
Facilitation
Occur?
Conclusions and
Applications

Eating in groups

Prejudice as a dominant
response

Electronic performance
monitoring (EPM)

Learning in groups
Cross-cultural differences
Working in Social Social Groups vs. Group
Groups Facilitation Loafing Individuals Creativity

The
Ringelmann
How Effect
productive Causes and
Cures
are people
Collective
when they Effort
Model
work on
simple Steiners Law of
Productivity
group AP = PP PL
tasks? Actual productivity is equal to
Potential Productivity Less Process
Loss
The Ringelmann People become less
productive when they
Effect work with others

Ringelmann
effect: The
tendency, first
documented by Max
Ringelmann, for
people to become
less productive when
they work with
others; this loss of
efficiency increases
as group size
increases, but at a
gradually decreasing
rate.
 Causes and Cures
The loss of productivity in groups
working on simple, additive tasks
is caused by two types of process
loss:
Coordination lossespeople cannot
combine their efforts with maximum
efficiency
Social loafing--the reduction of
individual effort exerted when people
work in groups compared to when
they work alone.
Latan, Williams, and
Harkins disentangled the
effects of both
coordination loss and
social loafing in their
studies of groups and
pseudo-groups
generating sound.
 Potential
Motivation
loss
Productivity

Coordination Pseudo
loss groups

Actual
Obtained groups
output
Ways to Increase
Social Motivation

Increase identifiability

Social compensation Minimize free-riding by making the

processes also work, in group as small as possible (6 2)
some cases, to reduce
process loss by
increasing the level of Set goals (specific, clear)
effort expended by
others in the group
Increase engagement by building in
interdependence

Increase identification with the

group (self < group)
Collective Effort Karau & Williams CEM applies motivation
Model theory to motivation in groups

Must share Loss of

the rewards motivation
with others in groups

Expectations Performance Rewards Motivation

Even if you
work hard Group rewards
other group not as valued as
members may personal rewards
not Valence
Working in How well will aSocial
Social group perform?
GroupsSteiner
vs. suggests
Group
Groups it all depends
Facilitation on the type
Loafing of task theCreativity
Individuals group is
attempting.
Additive
Tasks
Task demands are defined by divisibility, the
Compensa-
type of output desired, and the social
tory Tasks
combination rule used to combine individual
Disjunctive
members inputs.
Tasks

QuantityConjunctive
or
Divisibility Interdependence
Quality? Tasks
Discretion-
ary Tasks
Is quantity How are
Can the task produced Process individual
be broken more Gains in inputs
down into important Groups combined to
sub-tasks? than the yield a group
quality of the product?
performance?
Steiners Analysis of Task
Demands
 Groups outperform individuals
Additive on additive tasks, but at a
Tasks decreasing rate of gain.

100 Potential
Productivity
90
80
70
Relative Performance

Projected
60 Productivity
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Group Size
 The Wisdom of Crowds effect
Compensatory
Tasks occurs (sometimes) if members
judgments are averaged

Even a small group (8 Once the group reached 40

members) was wiser members, it became wiser
than an above-average than the best members.
single member.
 The Wisdom of Crowds effect
Compensatory
Tasks did not occur if problem was
very difficult

Individuals routinely outperformed

the ignorant crowd.
Disjunctive
Tasks Groups perform well on
disjunctive tasks if the group
includes at least one individual
who knows the correct solution.
The truth-wins rule usually holds
for groups working on Eureka
problems
The truth-supported-wins rule
holds for groups working on non-
Eureka problems.
Groups are better at problems that
have a known solution (intellective
tasks) rather than problems that
have no clear right or wrong answer
(judgmental tasks).
Conjunctive
Tasks
Groups perform poorly on
conjunctive tasks since the
groups outcome is substantially
influenced by its weakest link.

Group improve at such tasks if they

can be subdivided and each task
assigned to the person most capable
of performing it.
When the Kohler effect occurs, the
poorest performing member improves
his/her performance to keep up with
the others.
Discretionary
Tasks

The effectiveness of groups working on discretionary tasks

covaries with the method chosen to combine individuals
inputs.
Process Gains in
Groups

The search for synergy--

achieving collectively
results that could not be
achieved by any member
working alone
continues, but synergy is
VERY rare.

Synergy is so rare that Steiners Law does

not include a Process Gain element:
AP = PP PL + PG
Working in Social Social Groups vs. Group
Groups Facilitation Loafing Individuals Creativity

Additive
Brain-
Brainstorming Tasks
storming
rules Compensa-
tory Tasks Improving
Disjunctive Brain-
Be expressive Tasks storming

Conjunctive
Postpone Tasks Alternatives

evaluation Discretion-
ary Tasks

Process
Seek quantity Gains in
Groups

Piggyback
ideas
 Maximizing Creativity in Groups

Problems with Brainstorming Alternatives

Social loafing brainwriting

synectics
Production blocking
nominal-group
Social matching technique (NGT)
electronic
Illusion of productivity
brainstorming (EBS)
Delphi
Buzz groups
Working in Social Social Groups vs. Group
Groups Facilitation Loafing Individuals Creativity

Groups Performance The Additive

with a in the Ringelmann Tasks Brain-
Purpose Presence of Effect storming
Others Compensa-
When to tory Tasks
Causes and Improving
Work in
Why Does Cures Brain-
Groups Disjunctive
Social Tasks storming
Facilitation Collective
The Process Occur? Effort Conjunctive
Model of Model Tasks Alternatives
Productivity
Conclusions Discretion-
and ary Tasks
Applications
Process
Gains in
Groups