The effects of task and reward interdependence on perceived effort, helping behavior, and group performance were investigated in a laboratory setting. Fifty-seven groups with 3 undergraduate students in each group completed two consecutive copyediting activities. Helping behavior was highest in groups with high task interdependence. However, no support was found for the interactive effects of task and reward interdependence. Differences across time were found for perceived effort, helping behavior, and performance. The implications of these findings suggest that the increased task complexity, introduced through the presence of high levels of task interdependence, can mitigate the positive performance effects of high levels of helping behavior and effort.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bonner, S. E., Hastie, R., Sprinkle, G. B., & Young, S. M. (2000). A review of the effects of financial incentives on performance in laboratory tasks: Implications for management accounting. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 12, 19-64.
2.
Campion, M., Medsker, G., & Higgs (1993). Relations between work group characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effect groups. Personnel Psychology, 46(4), 823-850.
3.
Campion, M. A., Papper, E. M.,& Medsker, G. J. (1996). Relations betweenwork team characteristics and effectiveness: A replication and extension. Personnel Psychology, 49, 429-452.
4.
DeMatteo, J. S., Eby, L. T.,& Sundstrom, E. (1998). Team-based rewards: Current empirical evidence and directions for future research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 141-183.
5.
Deutsch, M. (1949). Atheory of cooperation and competition. HumanRelations, 2, 129-152.
6.
Diboye, R. L. (1990). Laboratory vs. field research in industrial and organisational psychology. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organisational Psychology(pp. 1-34). New York: Wiley.
7.
Dobbins, G. H., Lane, I. M.,& Steiner, D. D. (1988). Anote on the role of laboratory methodologies inapplied behavioural research: Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 9, 281-286.
8.
Earley, P. C., Wojnaroski, P.,& Prest, W. (1987). Task planning and energy expended: Exploration of how goals influence performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 107-114.
9.
Fromkin, H. L.,& Streufert, S. (1983). Laboratory experimentation. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organisational Psychology(pp. 415-465). New York: Wiley.
10.
George, J. M., & James, L. R. (1993). Personality, affect, and behavior in groups revisited: Comment on aggregation, levels of analysis, and a recent application of within and between analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 798-804.
11.
Gersick, C. J. G. (1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9-41.
12.
Guzzo, R.,& Shea, G. (1992). Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists.
13.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design ofwork teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of Organizational Behavior(pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
14.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Working Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
Howell, D. C. (1997). Statistical Methods for Psychology(4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
16.
Howell, D. C. (1999). Fundamental statistics for the behavioral sciences(4th ed.). Pacific Grove: Duxbury.
17.
Hyatt, D. E.,& Ruddy, T. M. (1997). An examination of the relationship betweenwork group characteristics and performance: Once more into the breech. Personnel Psychology, 50, 553-585.
18.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G.,& Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interraterreliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(1), 85-98.
19.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
20.
Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Hattrup, K. (1992). A disagreement about within-group agreement: Disentangling issues of consistency versus consensus. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(2), 161-167.
21.
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356-376.
22.
Mohrman, S., Cohen, S., & Mohrman, A. (1995). Designing team-based organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
24.
Pearce, J. L.,& Gregersen, H. B. (1991). Task interdependence and extrarole behavior: Atest of the mediating effects of felt responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 838-844.
25.
Saavedra, R., Earley, P. C., & Van Dyne, L. (1993). Complex interdependence in taskperforming groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 61-72.
26.
Shea, G. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1989). Groups as humanresources. In G. R. Ferris & K. M. Rowlands (Eds.), Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management(Vol. 5, pp. 323-356). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
27.
Stewart, G. L., & Barrick, M. R. (2000). Team structure and performance: Assessing the mediating role of intrateam process and the moderating role of task type. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 135-148.
28.
Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. (1977). Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organization Studies, 2, 419-427.
29.
Van derVegt, G., Emans, B.,& Van de Vilert, E. (1999). Effects of interdependencies in project teams. Journal of Social Psychology, 139(2), 202-215.
30.
Van derVegt, G., Emans, B.,& Van deVilert, E. (2001). Patterns of interdependence inwork teams: A two-level investigation of the relations with job and team satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 51-69.
31.
Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108-119.
32.
Wageman, R. (1995). Interdependence and group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(1), 145-181.
33.
Wageman, R., & Baker, G. (1997). Incentives and cooperation: The joint effects of task and reward interdependence on group performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 139-158.
34.
West, M. A., Borrill, C. S.,& Unsworth, K. L. (1998). Team effectiveness in organizations. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson(Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology(Vol. 13, pp. 1-48). London: Wiley.
