Blog 2 - Group Productivity

Group Productivity
Are people more or less productive when they work in groups? What can be done to increase productivity in groups?


Group productivity has been the focus of a great deal of research in the psychology field particularly in relation to the productivity of groups in an employment, social or informational setting such as those of a focus group. Group dynamics have been studied across many different paradigms within psychology. The idea of group productivity becomes increasingly poignant when considering the formation and use of groups to determine our social and physical surroundings such as the employment of regulatory bodies and the use of juries, as well as our day-to-day social interactions and societal expectations.

More or Less?

The roles of groups and their responding productivity is an important area of study within social psychology as a great deal of the western world employs the formation of groups and social settings in order to in-still values as well as for educational purposes. Buunk, Cohen-Schotanus and Henk van Nek (2007) suggested that social comparisons within (educational training) groups could produce maladaptive results and increase stress. They found that this was particularly evident if the students identified downward, with groups that performed less well than if they identified upward, with groups that performed better. They also found that this created performance anxiety and thus reduced their productivity/ability. The study also found that group members engaged in comparison with others most commonly for self-evaluation purposes, with downward comparisons focused on self-enhancement and upward comparisons focusing on self-improvement. The suggestion posited by Buunk, Cohen-Schotanus and Henk van Nek (2007) was that educators might need to pay greater attention to the potentially maladaptive nature of within group comparisons.

Group Composition and Task difficulty

Whether people are more or less productive in a group as opposed to individually can depend on the nature of the task as well as the composition of the group. LePine (2005) stated that there was a positive correlation between the group member’s cognitive ability and their ability to adapt and perform as well as their goal orientation and the degree of difficulty of the task. Furthermore the study showed that a group that was composed of high-learning members and was faced with difficult goals was more likely to adapt and perform better than those that were staffed with high-performance members, which were considerably less likely to be able to adapt and perform. This study went further in its measures than most previous studies such as that of Behling, Coady, and Hopple (1967). The study measured the results at an individual outcome level making the results much more appropriate in the consideration of productivity of groups versus that of individuals. Critically the study was mainly focused on the result of an unexpected circumstance and the ability of the group to react as well as the importance of goal structure. This may have created a novelty affect and biased the results of individual productivity in a group setting.

Sex Differences

Benenson and Heath (2006) suggested that there is a causal relationship between sex differences and group productivity, based on social structure preferences of males and females. The study proposed that Males were more likely to withdraw and thus be less productive in a one-on-one (dyad) situation whereas females were more likely to withdraw in a group setting. The study also showed that females were more likely to focus on one individual within a group setting than their male counterparts. This study shows that the group dynamic may increase of decrease performance and productivity of its individual members in numerous ways many of which can be explained by social constructs within the group and the larger society the group belongs with. Critically this study was conducted on ninety-eight 10-year-old participants. Future research into the productivity in older age groups may be beneficial in determining if sex differences in regard to social structure continue into and throughout adulthood.

Culture

As suggested above the society and culture of the members of a group may also affect their productivity in numerous ways. Spencer-Rodgers, Williams, Hamilton and Peng (2007) stated that there is a difference in the tendency to engage in stereotyping between Chinese and American groups on the basis of group membership. The study showed that Chinese group members were more likely to engage in stereotyping than their American counter-parts when group membership was available as a source of dispositional inference. The study also showed that Chinese group members perceived culturally diverse groups as more entitative. Furthermore they credited more diverse groups and their members with more internally consistent dispositions. The results of this study suggest that the culture that a group belongs to can affect their productivity particularly when attributing certain values to groups on the basis of stereotyping. The study showed the propensity of mainland Chinese participants to engage in such stereotyping and thus brings up the concept of different cultural influences, expectations and acceptability within groups, such as those of the more collectivist nations like China and less collectivist nations including America.

Group Norms and Groupthink

All of the above components contribute to what is considered a group norm that is the baseline of the group make-up including the attributional composition of its members. Postmes, Spears and Cihangir (2001) suggested that group norms had a strong influence on the quality of the decisions the groups made as well as their tendency to engage in groupthink. The studied showed that a critical group norm improved the quality of the decision, whereas as a consensus group norm did not. Beyond this the study showed that group norms had no effect on individual decisions suggesting that it was limited to a group effect. This area of study is becoming increasingly important as the tendency of groups to engage in consensus norms and groupthink is becoming better established. It is also important in determining the content and preventative actions of these concepts.

Increased productivity

Productivity can be increased through greater sensitivity to the above aspects and the varying forms of group membership, group make-up and task context. By becoming aware of these aspects of group productivity and their potential to hinder performance it may be possible to decrease their effect. More specific details and methods of increasing productivity are as follows.

Abrams, Rutland, Cameron and Jennifer Ferrell (2007) suggested that in-group accountability played an important role in regulating group performance. The study revealed that participants (middle aged children) were strongly influenced by their peers in decision making about group members that have different characteristics than were perceived to be the norm and that as they became older they developed more sophisticated evaluative measures. The findings of this study suggest that to achieve a better group dynamic and greater productivity it may be beneficial to increase individually accountability for group activities. Critically further research should be conducted in order to establish whether an increase in such accountability at this age has the same results as adults as well as if increased accountability results in decreased contribution at an individual level.

De Dreu (2007) posited groups performed better through increased information sharing and a perceived sense of cooperative outcome interdependence. This resulted in an increase in the amount group members learnt and increases in how effect they were. De Dreu states that such findings within an organizational team setting (participants involved managers and their respective teams) allowed for this method to be generalized to organization settings as opposed to the confines of the laboratory. The results of this study suggest that to increase productivity within a group it may be useful to encourage the concept of cooperative interdependence outcomes.

In conclusion current research suggests that there is no definitive answer to whether people perform better in groups or individually as a group can be formed in virtually limitless scenarios with varying group member make-up. What has been suggested however is that there can be many components to increasing group productivity and decreasing hindrances, which is consistently addressed through the identification of such issues as well as group education. Measures such as increased accountability, identification of groupthink and cultural and individual group make-up are all well supported. Future research may be required in attempting to unify these concepts into effective methods of increasing group productivity. However a universal approach does not seem viable due to cultural and societal influences, culture specific initiatives may be more effective.



References:

Abrams, D., Rutland, A., Cameron, L., & Ferrell, J. (2007). Older but wilier: in-group accountability and the development of subjective group dynamics. Developmental Psychology 43, (1), 134–148.

Behling, O., Coady, N., & Hopple, T. G. (1967). Small group adaptation to
unprogrammed change. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,
2, 73–83.

Benenson, J.F., & Heath, A. (2006). Boys withdraw more in one-on-one interactions, whereas girls withdraw more in groups. Developmental Psychology 42, (2), 272–282

Buunk, A.P., Cohen-Schotanus, J., & Henk van Nek, R. (2007) Why and how people engage in social comparison while learning social skills in groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 11, (3), 140–152.

De Dreu, C.K.W. (2007) Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity, and team effectiveness: A motivated information processing perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology 92, (3), 628–638.

LePine, J.A. (2005). Adaptation of teams in response to unforeseen change: effects of goal difficulty and team composition in terms of cognitive ability and goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology 90, (6), 1153–1167.

Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. (2001). Quality of decision making
and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 918–930.

Spencer-Rodgers, J., Williams, M.J., Hanilton, D.L., Peng, K., & Wang, L. (2007)
Culture and Group Perception: Dispositional and Stereotypic InferencesAbout Novel and National Groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93, (4), 525–543.


Appendix A: Self-evaluation.

1. Theory
The use of key theoretical literature is evident in this web log. The use of up to date information and the establishment of the fundamental attributes of the question have been identified and addressed individually such as culture, individual make-up, group norms, group think and several strategies for increasing group productivity and reducing phenomena such as group think. The blog has attempted to use relevant theory to support the findings of research as well as engaging in critical analysis of each area.

2. Research
The use of up to date and relevant information was crucial to the accuracy of this essay due to the nature of the topic. Because the field of psychology is constantly updating the available information in regard to groups it was important to source recent information. The use of recent findings was particularly necessary when considering the cultural aspect of the topic. Critically the use of contradictory research may have been beneficial however the availability of this was limited.

3. Written Expression
MS word provides a Flesch reading ease of 28 and a flesch-Kincaid grade level of 12.0. The use of APA in this blog is not perfect. However this may be because of the nature of the medium as well as the users familiarity with this medium. All referencing attempted to stay within the confines of APA as much as possible. The use of sub-headings has increased the readability of the blog as well as providing the reader with a quick reference guide as to the content. Critically more attention may have been needed in keeping within APA limits and the use of graphics in aiding understanding may be beneficial.

4. Online engagement
Online engagement is the weakest of the 4 criteria. The blog was not used to the best of its ability in terms of its communication facilities and overall online engagement could have been much better. The blog does attempt to create a user friendly interface in terms of the structure of information as well as the actual content. Critically the blog had much greater potential for communication than what was used.