This study examines the relationship between group processes and group performance and cohesion in task and social groups. Subjects completed the Group Environment Scale (GES) and a brief questionnaire describing a group: 95 described a social group, and 49 described a task group. Task groups were rated higher on order and organization, leader control, and task orientation. Social groups scored higher on expressiveness, self-discovery, and innova tion. GES scales correlated with cohesion in both task and social groups were cohesion, self-discovery, leader support, and independence. Performance in social groups was related to task orientation, order and organization, leader support, cohesion, and leader control. Results supported the conceptual distinction between cohesion and performance and the importance ofprocesses dealing with both the task and group maintenance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bales, R.F. (1976). Interaction process analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1950)
Cartwright, D. (1968). The nature of group cohesiveness. In D. Cartwright & A. ZanderGroup dynamics Research and theory (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
6.
Coch, L., & French, J R.P. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations, 1, 512-532.
7.
Cummings, T.G. (1978). Self-regulating work groups: A socio-technical synthesis. Academy of Management Review, 3, 625-634.
8.
Cummings, T.G. (1981). Designing effective work groups. In P. C. Mystrom, III, & W. H. Starbuck, Handbook of organizational design, 2: Remodeling organizations and their environments. New York: Oxford University Press.
9.
Fiedler, F.E. (1978). The contingency model and the dynamics of the leadership process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 12). New York: Academic Press.
10.
Forsyth, D.R. (1983). An introduction to group dynamics, Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
11.
Fouriezos, N.T., Hutt, M.L., & Guetzkow, H. (1950). Measurement of self-oriented needs in discussion groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 45, 682-690.
12.
Goodman, P., Ravlin, E.C., & Argote, L. (1986). Current thinking about groups: Setting the stage for new ideas. In P. S. Goodman (Ed.), Designing effective work groups. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
13.
Gladstein, D. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness . Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 499-517.
14.
Greene, C.N. (1972). The satisfaction-performance controversy. Business Horizons, 15(5), 31-41.
15.
Hackman, J.R. (1983). A normative model of work team effectiveness. Technical Report No. 2, Research Program on Group Effectiveness, YaleSchool of Organization & Management .
16.
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.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8). New York: Academic Press.
17.
Hackman, J.R., Brousseau, K.R., & Weiss, J.A. (1976). The interaction of task design and group effectiveness . Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 350-365.
18.
Harper, N.L., & Askling, L.R. (1980). Group communication and quality of task solution in a media production organizationCommunication Monographs , 47, 77-100.
19.
Herold, D.M. (1980). The effectiveness of work groups. In S. Kerr (Ed.), Organizational behavior (pp. 95-110). Columbus, OH: Grid.
20.
Kolodny, H., & Kiggundu, M. (1980). Towards the development of a sociotechnical systems model in woodlands mechanical harvesting. Human Relations , 33, 623-645.
Moos, R.H., & Humphrey, B. (1974). Group environment scale, Form R. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
23.
Morse, N.C., & Reimer, E. (1956). The experimental change of a major organizational variable. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 120-129.
24.
Myers, A.E. (1962). Team competition, success, and adjustment of group members.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 325-332.
25.
Osborn, A.F. (1957). Applied imagination. New York : Scribner.
26.
Seashore, S.E. (1954). Group cohesiveness in the industrial work group . Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
27.
Shaw, M.E. (1964). Communication networks. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social Psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Academic Press.
28.
Steiner, I.D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
29.
Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership. New York: Free Press.
30.
Van de Ven, A.H. (1974). Group decision making and effectiveness: An experimental study. Kent, OH: Kent State University, Center for Business and Economic Research.
31.
Vroom, V.H., & Yetton, P. (1973). Leadership and decision making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
32.
Zander, A. (1982). Making groups effective. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
