This study uses narrative data from participating group members to identify retrospective accounts of why groups succeed or fail. Analysis of stories describing task group success and failure revealed seven general categories of themes that people in the American culture believe influence group performance: relationships, group structure, group process, member emotions, group communication, member attributes, and external forces. Of those, a comparison of standardized frequencies revealed significant differences between the group success and failure stories in regards to relationships, member emotions, and member attributes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ball, M. (1990). A case study of the Kennedy administration’s decision-making concerning the Diem coup of November, 1963. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 54, 557-574.
2.
Ball, M. (1994). Vacillating about Vietnam: Secrecy, duplicity, and confusion in the communication of President Kennedy and his advisors. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context (pp. 181-198). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
Barge, J. K. , & Keyton, J. (1994). Contextualizing power and social influence in groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context (pp. 85-106). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
Berteotti, C. R. , & Seibold, D. R. (1994). Coordination and role-definition problems in health-care teams: A hospice case study. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context (pp. 107-134). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
Bettenhausen, K. L. (1991). Five years of group research: What have we learned and what needs to be addressed. Journal of Management, 17, 345-381.
6.
Bormann, E. G. (1970). The paradox and promise of small group research. Speech Monographs, 37, 211-217.
7.
Brashers, D. E. , Adkins, M., & Meyers, R. A. (1994). Argumentation and computer-mediated group decision making. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context (pp. 263-283). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
Briggs, M. H. (1993). Team talk: Communication skills for early intervention teams. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 15, 33-40.
9.
Cohen, J. A. (1960). Coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
10.
Cohen, S. G. , Ledford, G.E.J., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). A predictive model of self-managing work team effectiveness. Human Relations, 49, 643-676.
11.
Cragan, J. F. , & Wright, D. W. (1990). Small group communication research of the 1980s: A synthesis and critique. Communication Studies, 41, 212-236.
12.
Frey, L. R. (1994). Call and response: The challenge of conducting research on communication in natural groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context (pp. 293-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Frey, L. R. (1996). Remembering and “re-membering”: A history of theory and research on communication and group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (2nd ed., pp. 19-51). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Geist, P. , & Chandler, T. (1984). An account analysis of influence in group decision making. Communication Monographs, 51, 67-78.
15.
Gouran, D. S. (1994). On the value of case studies of decision-making and problem-solving groups. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), Group communication in context (pp. 305-316). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
Graham, E. E. , Papa, M. J., & McPherson, M. B. (1997). An applied test of the functional communication perspective of small group decision-making. Southern Communication Journal, 62, 269-279.
17.
Guzzo, R. A. (1986). Group decision making and group effectiveness in organizations. In P. S. Goodman & Associates (Eds.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 34-71). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
Hackman, J. R. (Ed.). (1990). Groups that work (and those that don’t). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19.
Hackman, J. R. , & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction processes, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed synthesis. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 45-99). San Diego: Academic Press.
20.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.
21.
Herek, G. , Janis I. L., & Huth, P. (1987). Decision making during international crises: Is quality of process related to outcome?Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31, 203-226.
22.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1982). Group communication and problem-solving effectiveness I: A critical review of inconsistent findings. Communication Studies, 30, 134-141.
23.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1996). Communication and group decision-making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (2nd ed., pp. 269-297). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24.
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
25.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
26.
Jorgenson, D. L. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27.
Larson, C. E. , & LaFasto, F.M.J. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
28.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
29.
McGrath, J. E. (1997). Small group research: That once and future field. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 1, 1-36.
30.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
31.
Poole, M. S. , Keyton, J., & Frey, L. R. (1999). Group communication methodology: Issues and considerations. In L. R. Frey, D. S. Gouran, & M. S. Poole (Eds.), The handbook of group communication theory and research (pp. 92-114). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32.
Propp, K. M. , & Nelson, D. (1996). Problem-solving performance in naturalistic groups: A test of the ecological validity of the functional perspective. Communication Studies, 47, 35-45.
33.
Putnam, L. L. , & Stohl, C. (1996). Bona fide groups: An alternative perspective for communication and small group decision making. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (pp. 147-178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
Thibaut, J. W. , & Riecken, H. W. (1955). Some determinants and consequences of the perception of social causality. Journal of Personality, 24, 113-133.
