The functional perspective is a normative approach to describing and predicting group performance that focuses on the functions of inputs and/or processes. The aim of theory and research from this perspective is to understand why some groups are successful and others are not. This article investigates theory and, to a lesser extent, research of small groups based on the functional perspective. The authors present the underlying theoretical assumptions and review theories that fit into the functional perspective from several representative areas of research. They conclude by outlining notable strengths and weaknesses associated with viewing groups from this perspective and propose some directions for future theory development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, T. J. (1984). Managing the flow of technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information within R&D organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 123-148.
3.
Ancona, D., & Caldwell, D. (1992). Bringing the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 634-665.
4.
Ancona, D., & Chong, C. (1996). Entrainment: Pace, cycle, and rhythm in organizational behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 18, pp. 251-284). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
5.
Ancona, D., & Chong, C. (1999). Cycles and synchrony: The temporal role of context in team behavior. In R. Wageman (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams: Groups in context (Vol. 2, pp. 33-48). Stamford, CT: JAI.
6.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7.
Becker, S. W., & Baloff, N. (1969). Organization structure and complex problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 260-271.
8.
Brown, V. R., & Paulus, P. B. (2002). Making group brainstorming more effective: Recommendations from an associative memory perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 208-212.
9.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organization alanalysis. London: Heinemann.
10.
Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. W. (1968). Group dynamics research and theory (3rd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.
11.
Cummings, J. (2001). Work groups and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
12.
Davis, J. H. (1969). Individual-group problem solving, subject preference, and problem type. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 13, 362-374.
13.
Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97-125.
14.
Davis, J. H. (1982). Social interaction as a combinatorial process in group decision. In H. Brandstatter, J. H. Davis, & G. Stocker-Kreichgauer (Eds.), Group decision making(pp. 27-58). London: Academic Press.
15.
Davis, J. H., Bray, R. M., & Holt, R. W. (1977). The empirical study of social decision processes in juries: A critical review. In J. Tapp & F. Levine (Eds.), Law, justice, and the individual in society: Psychological and legal issues (pp. 326-361). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
16.
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston: D. C. Heath.
18.
Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 497-509.
19.
Esser, J. K., & Lindoerfer, J. S. (1989). Groupthink and the space shuttle Challenger accident: Toward a quantitative case analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2, 167-177.
20.
Evans, W. (1965). Conflict and performance in R&D management. Industrial Management Review, 7, 37-46.
21.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
22.
Gouran, D. S. (1984). Communicative influences related to the Watergate coverup: The failure of collective judgment. Central State Speech Journal, 35, 260-268.
23.
Gouran, D. S. (1990). Factors affecting the decision-making process in the attorney general’s commission on pornography: A case study of unwarranted collective judgment. In R. S. Rogers (Ed.), Free speech yearbook (Vol. 28, pp. 104-119). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.
24.
Gouran, D. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (1983). The role of communication in decision-making groups: A functional perspective. In M. S. Mander (Ed.), Communications in transition(pp. 168-185). New York: Praeger.
25.
Gouran, D. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (1996). Functional theory and communication in decisionmaking and problem-solving groups: An expanded view. In R. Y. Hirokawa & M. S. Poole (Eds.), Communication and group decision-making (2nd ed., pp. 55-80). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
Gouran, D. S., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (2003). Effective decision making and problem solving in groups: A functional perspective. In R. Y. Hirokawa, R. S. Cathcart, L. A. Samovar, & L. D. Henman (Eds.), Small group communication (pp. 27-38). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
27.
Gouran, D. S., Hirokawa, R. Y., & Martz, A. E. (1986) A critical analysis of factors related to decisional processes involved in the Challenger disaster. Central States Speech Journal, 37, 119-135.
28.
Greitemeyer, T., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2003). Preference-consistent evaluation of information in the hidden profile paradigm: Beyond group-level explanations for the dominance of shared information in group decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 322-339.
29.
Guetzkow, H., & Gyr, J. (1954). An analysis of conflict in decision-making groups. Human Relations, 7, 367-381.
30.
Guzzo, R. A., Wagner, D. B., MacGuire, E., Herr, B., & Hawley, C. (1986). Implicit theories and the evaluation of group processes and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 279-295.
31.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
32.
Hackman, J. R. (1990). Groups that work (and those that don’t). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advance in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 45-99). New York: Academic Press.
34.
Hackman, J. R., & Walton, R. E. (1986). Leading groups in organizations. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups (pp. 72-119). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
35.
Hansen, M. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82-111.
36.
Hensley, T. R., & Griffen, G. W. (1986). Victims of groupthink: The Kent State University board of trustees and the 1977 gymnasium controversy. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30, 497-531.
37.
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.
38.
Hinsz, V. B. (1990). Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 705-718.
39.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1982). Group communication and problem-solving effectiveness I: A critical review of inconsistent findings. Communication Quarterly, 30, 134-141.
40.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1983). Group communication and problem-solving effectiveness II: An exploratory investigation of procedural functions. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 47, 59-74.
41.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1985). Discussion procedures and decision-making performance: A test of a functional perspective. Human Communication Research, 12, 203-224.
42.
Hirokawa, R. Y. (1988). Group communication and decision-making performance: A continued test of the functional perspective. Human Communication Research, 14, 487-515.
43.
Hirokawa, R. Y., Gouran, D. S., & Martz, A. E. (1988). Understanding the sources of faulty group decision making: A lesson from the Challenger disaster. Small Group Behavior, 19, 411-433.
44.
Hirokawa, R. Y., & Rost, K. M. (1992). Effective group decision making in organizations: Field test of the vigilant interaction theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 5, 267-288.
45.
Hollingshead, A. B., Wittenbaum, G. M., Paulus, P. B., Hirokawa, R. Y., Ancona, D. G., Peterson, R. S., et al. (2004). Understanding theory and research on groups from the functional perspective. In M. S. Poole & A. B. Hollingshead (Eds.), Theories of small groups: An interdisciplinary perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
Homans, G. C. (1950). The human group. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
47.
Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
48.
Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
49.
Janis, I. L. (1985). Source of error in strategic decision making. In J. M. Pennings (Ed.), Organizational strategy and change (pp. 157-197). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
50.
Janis, I. L. (1989). Crucial decisions: Leadership in policy-making and management. New York: Free Press.
51.
Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.
52.
Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.
53.
Jehn, K. A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 520-557.
54.
Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 238-251.
55.
Jehn, K. A., Northcraft, G., & Neale, M. (1999). Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 741-763.
56.
Katz, R., & Tushman, M. L. (1979). Communication patterns, and project performance and task characteristics: Empirical evaluation and integration in an R&D setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 139-162.
57.
Kiesler, S. (1978). Interpersonal processes in groups and organizations. Arlington Heights, IL: AHM.
58.
LaFasto, L. M. J., & Larson, C. E. (2001). When teams work best: 6000 team members and leaders tell what it takes to succeed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
59.
Larson, C. E., & LaFasto, L. M. J. (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/what can go wrong. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
60.
Laughlin, P. R. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (pp. 127-155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
61.
Laughlin, P. R. (1988). Collective induction: Group performance, social combination processes, and mutual majority and minority influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 254-267.
62.
Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177-189.
63.
Laughlin, P. R., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1995). A theory of collective induction. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 94-107.
64.
Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of typological psychology (F. Heider & G. M. Heider, Trans.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
65.
McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22, 147-174.
66.
McGrath, J. E., Arrow, H., & Berdahl, J. L. (2000). The study of groups: Past, present, and future. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 95-105.
67.
McGrath, J. E., Kelly, J. R., & Rhodes, J. E. (1993) A feminist perspective on research methodology: Some metatheoretical issues, contrasts, and choices. In S. Oskamp & M. Costanzo (Eds.), Gender issues in social psychology: The Claremont symposium on applied social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 19-37). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
68.
McGrath, J. E., & Rotchford, N. L. (1983). Time and behavior in organizations. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 57-101). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
69.
Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 3-23.
70.
Nijstad, B. A., Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (2003). Cognitive stimulation and interference in idea generating groups. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 137-159). New York: Oxford University Press.
71.
Orlitzky, M., & Hirokawa, R. Y. (2001). To err is human, to correct for it divine: A meta-analysis of research testing the functional theory of group decision-making effectiveness. Small Group Research, 32, 313-341.
72.
Osborn, A. (1949). Your creative power: How to use imagination. New York: Scribner.
73.
Park, W. W. (1990). A review of the research on groupthink. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 229-245.
74.
Parsons, T. (1964). Recent trends in structural-functional theory. In E. W. Count & G. T. Bowles (Eds.), Fact and theory in social science (pp. 140-158). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse Press.
75.
Paulus, P. B., & Brown, V. (2003). Ideational creativity in groups: Lessons from research on brainstorming. In P. B. Paulus, & B. A. Nijstad (Eds.), Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration (pp. 110-136). New York: Oxford University Press.
76.
Paulus, P. B., Dugosh, K. L., Dzindolet, M. T., Coskun, H., & Putman, V. L. (2002). Social and cognitive influences in group brainstorming: Predicting production gains and losses. European Review of Social Psychology, 12, 299-325.
77.
Pavitt, C. (1994). Theoretical commitments presupposed by functional approaches to group discussion. Small Group Research, 25, 520-541.
78.
Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615-631.
79.
Perrow, C. (1967). A framework for the comparative analysis of organizations. American Sociological Review, 32, 194-208.
80.
Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Cihangir, S. (2001). Quality of decision making and group norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 918-930.
81.
Propp, K. M., & Nelson, D. (1995). Decision-making performance in naturalistic groups: A test of the ecological validity of the functional perspective. Unpublished manuscript.
82.
Pruitt, D. G. (1981). Negotiation behavior. New York: Academic Press.
83.
Stasser, G. (1992). Pooling of unshared information during group discussion. In S. Worchel, W. Wood, & J. Simpson (Eds.), Group process and productivity (pp. 48-57). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
84.
Stasser, G. (1999). The uncertain role of unshared information in collective choice. In L. L. Thompson, J. M. Levine & D. M. Messick (Eds.), Shared cognition in organizations: The management of knowledge (pp. 49-69). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
85.
Stasser, G., & Stewart, D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426-434.
86.
Stasser, G., Taylor, L. A., & Hanna, C. (1989). Information sampling in structured and unstructured discussions of three- and six-person groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 67-78.
87.
Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
88.
Staw, B. M. (1975). Attributions of the ‘causes’of performance: An alternative interpretation of cross-sectional research on organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 13, 414-432.
89.
Sundstrom, E. (1999). Supporting work team effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
90.
’t Hart, P. (1990). Groupthink in government: A study of small groups and policy failure. Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.
91.
Turner, M. E., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1998). Twenty-five years of groupthink theory and research: Lessons from the evaluation of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 105-115.
92.
Winquist, J. R., & Larson, J. R., Jr. (1998). Information pooling: When it impacts group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 371-377.
93.
Wittenbaum, G. M., Hubbell, A. P., & Zuckerman, C. (1999). Mutual enhancement: Toward an understanding of the collective preference for shared information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 967-978.
94.
Wittenbaum, G. M., & Park, E. S. (2001). The collective preference for shared information. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 70-73.
95.
Wittenbaum, G. M., & Stasser, G. (1996). Management of information in small groups. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (Eds.), What’s social about social cognition? Social cognition research in small groups (pp. 3-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
