Везде

RAS Social ScienceПсихологический журнал Psikhologicheskii zhurnal

  • ISSN (Print) 0205-9592
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-588X

Subject characteristics of small work groups and their socio-psychological and productive-economic efficiency

You can
PII
S020595920000428-6-1
DOI
10.31857/S020595920000070-3
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
A. Sidorenkov
N. Ul'yanova
  • Affiliation: Southern Federal University
  • Address: 344006, Rostov-on-Don, Bolshaya Sadovaya st., 105/42, Russia.
Volume/ Edition
Volume 39 / №4
Pages
49-60
Abstract

Correlation between subject’s characteristics of small work groups (object-action and sociopsychological unity, norms of productivity and norms of openness, motivational unity) and indices of perceived by group members productive – economic efficiency (“fulfillment of plan and solution of current affairs” and “activity in difficult situations”) as well as indices of socio-psychological efficiency of group and informal group (“satisfaction of group/subgroup members and results of its activity”, “psychological comfort in group/subgroup of their members” and assistance of group/subgroup in their members’ development”) have been studied. On a sample of 37 industrial groups (N=331, female – 51.7%, male – 48.3%, aged 19 – 62) it was revealed that cohesion (at the group and informal group level) and group norms (at the group level in general) are predictors for all indices of socio-psychological efficiency while motivational unity is a predictor for productive – economic efficiency “activity in difficult situations”. Internally linked complexes of certain group’s subjects characteristics have been shown to be predictors for some indices of socio-psychological efficiency of groups and informal subgroups. Some group characteristics (cohesion, e.g) mediate effect of other characteristics (motivational unity) on group sociopsychological efficiency. High – and low-efficient groups are characterized by different, with a few exceptions, combinations of cohesion levels and norms of productivity.

Keywords
cohesion, motivational unity, norm of productivity, norm of openness, productive – economic efficiency, socio-psychological efficiency
Date of publication
14.10.2018
Year of publication
2018
Number of purchasers
10
Views
910

References

  1. 1. Gorbatenko A.S. Metodika opredelenija struktury maloj gruppy s pomoshh'ju formalizovannogo analiza mezhlichnostnyh vyborov // Voprosy psihologii. 1984. № 4. P. 112–118. (in Russian)
  2. 2. Mingaleeva G.A., Shihirev P.N. Gruppovye ustanovki v sovmestnoj dejatel'nosti proizvodstvennyh brigad // Social'nopsihologicheskie problemy brigadnoj formy organizacii truda / Eds. E. V. Shorohova, A. L. Zhuravlev. Moscow: Nauka, 1987. P. 110–119. (in Russian)
  3. 3. Metodiki social'no-psihologicheskogo izuchenija malyh grupp v organizacii: monografija / Ed. A.V. Sidorenkov. Rostov-naDonu: JuFU, 2012. (in Russian)
  4. 4. Nemov R.S., Sinjagin Ju.V. Motivacija dostizhenija, uroven' pritjazanija i jeffektivnost' gruppovoj dejatel'nosti // Psihologicheskij zhurnal. 1987. V. 8. № 1. P. 46–54. (in Russian)
  5. 5. Nemov R.S., Shestakov A.G. Splochennost' kak faktor gruppovoj jeffektivnosti // Voprosy psihologii. 1981. № 3. P. 113–119. (in Russian)
  6. 6. Sidorenkov A.V. Malaja gruppa i neformal'naja podgruppa: mikrogruppovaja teorija. Rostov-na-Donu: JuFU, 2010. (in Russian)
  7. 7. Sidorenkov A.V., Ul'janova N.Ju. Metodiki izuchenija jeffektivnosti malyh proizvodstvennyh grupp // Rossijskij psihologicheskij zhurnal. 2011. V. 8. № 4. P. 9–17. (in Russian)
  8. 8. Argote L. Agreement about norms and work-unit effectiveness: Evidence from the field // Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 1989. № 10(2). P. 131–140.
  9. 9. Beal D.J., Cohen R.R., Burke M.J. & McLendon C.L. Cohesion and performance in groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations // Journal of Applied Psychology. 2003. № 88. R. 989–1004.
  10. 10. Berkowitz L. Group standards, cohesiveness, and productivity // Human Relations. 1954. № 7. R. 509–519.
  11. 11. Berkowitz L. Social norms, feelings and other factors affecting helping and altruism // Advances in experimental social psychology / Ed. L. Berkowitz. New York: Academic Press, 1972. V. 6. P. 63–108.
  12. 12. Carless S.A. & Paola C. The measurement of cohesion in work teams // Small group research. 2000. № 31(1). P. 71–88.
  13. 13. Carron A.V., Colman M.M., Wheeler J. & Stevens D. Cohesion and performance in sport: A meta-analysis // Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 2002. № 24. R. 168–188.
  14. 14. Carron A.V. & Brawley L.R. Cohesion: Conceptual and measurement issues // Small Group Research. 2000. № 31. R. 89–106.
  15. 15. Carron A.V. & Dennis P.W. The sport team as an effective group // Applied sport psychology: Personal growth to peak performance / Ed. J.M. Williams. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1998. P. 127–141.
  16. 16. Carron A.V. & Hausenblas H.A. Group dynamics in sport. Ontario: Book Crafters, 1998.
  17. 17. Chang A. & Bordia P. A multidimensional approach to the group cohesion-group performance relationship // Small group research. 2001. № 32(4). P. 379–405.
  18. 18. Chansler P.A., Swamidass P.M. & Cammann C. Selfmanaging work teams an empirical study of group cohesiveness in “Natural work groups” at a HarleyDavidson motor company plant // Small Group Research. 2003. № 34(1). P. 101–120.
  19. 19. Chiocchio F. & Essiembre H. Cohesion and performance: A meta-analytic review of disparities between project teams, production teams, and service teams // Small Group Research. 2009. № 40(4). R. 382–420.
  20. 20. Chow G.M. & Feltz D.L. Exploring new directions in collective efficacy and sport // Group dynamics in exercise and sport psychology / Eds. M.R. Beauchamp, M.A. Eys. N.Y.: Routledge, 2007. P. 221–245.
  21. 21. Cota A.A. et al. The structure of group cohesion // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1995. № 21(6). R. 572–580.
  22. 22. Ellemers N., De Gilder D. & Haslam S.A. Motivating individuals and groups at work: A social identity perspective on leadership and group performance // Academy of management review. 2004. № 29(3). P. 459–478.
  23. 23. Evans C.R. & Dion K.L. Group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis // Small group research. 1999. № 22. P. 175–186.
  24. 24. Gammage K.L., Carron A.V. & Estabrooks P.A. Team cohesion and individual productivity: The influence of the norm for productivity and the identifiability of individual effort // Small Group Research. 2001. № 32(1). P. 3–18.
  25. 25. Greene C.N. Cohesion and productivity in work groups // Small Group Behavior. 1989. № 20. R. 70–86.
  26. 26. Gully S.M., Devine D.J. & Whitney D.J. A meta-analysis of cohesion and performance: Effects of level of analysis and task interdependence // Small Group Research. 1995. № 26. R. 497–521.
  27. 27. Hogg M.A. The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. New York: John Wiley, 1992.
  28. 28. Jacobsen C.B., Hvitved J. & Andersen L.B. Command and motivation: how the perception of external interventions relates to intrinsic motivation and public service motivation // Public administration. 2013. № 1. P. 32–51.
  29. 29. Jordan M.H., Feild H.S. & Armenakis A.A. The relationship of group process variables and team performance: A team-level analysis in a field setting // Small group research. 2002. № 33(1). R. 121–150.
  30. 30. Jung D.I. & Sosik J.J. Group potency and collective efficacy: Examining their predictive validity, level of analysis, and effects of performance feedback on future group performance // Group & organization management. 2003. № 28(3). P. 366–391.
  31. 31. Karau S J. & Hart J.W. Group cohesiveness and social loafing: effects of a social interaction manipulation on individual motivation within groups // Group dynamics. 1998. № 2. P. 185–191.
  32. 32. Kim M. Performance norms and performance by teams in basketball competition // Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1995. № 80. P. 770.
  33. 33. Langfred C.W. Is group cohesiveness a double-edged sword? An investigation of the effects of cohesiveness on performance // Small Group Research. 1998. № 29(1). P. 124–143.
  34. 34. Liden R.C. et al. Social loafing: A field investigation // Journal of Management. 2004. № 30(2). P. 285–304.
  35. 35. Mullen B. & Copper C. The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration // Psychological Bulletin. 1994. № 115. R. 210–227.
  36. 36. Mulvey P.W. & Klein H.J. The impact of perceivedloafing and collective efficacy on group goal processes and group performance // Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 1998. № 74(1). P. 62–87.
  37. 37. Munroe K., Estabrooks P., Dennis P. & Carron A. A phenomenological analysis of group norms in sport teams // The sport psychologist. 1999. № 13. R. 171–182.
  38. 38. Oliver L.W., Harman J., Hoover E., Hayes S.M. & Pandhi N.A. A quantitative integration of the military cohesion literature // Military Psychology. 1999. № 11. R. 57–83.
  39. 39. Ramzaninezhad R. et al. The relationship between collective efficacy, group cohesion and team performance in professional volleyball teams // Brazilian Journal of Biomotricity. 2009. № 3(1). P. 31–39.
  40. 40. Rutkowski G.K., Gruder C.L. & Romer D. Group cohesiveness, social norms, and bystander intervention //Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983. № 44(3). P. 545–552.
  41. 41. Schachter S., Ellertson N., McBride D. & Gregory D. An experimental study of cohesiveness and productivity // Human Relations. 1951. № 4. R. 229–238.
  42. 42. Sidorenkov A.V. & Pavlenko R.V. GROUP PROFILE computer technique: A tool for complex study of small groups // SAGE Open. 2015. № 5(1). R. 1–13.
  43. 43. Song S.H. & Keller J.M. Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the dynamic aspects of motivation // Educational technology research and development. 2001. № 49(2). P. 5–22.
  44. 44. Tekleab A.G., Quigley N.R. & Tesluk P.E. A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness // Group & organization management. 2009. № 34. P. 170–205.
  45. 45. Wegge J. & Haslam S.A. Group goal setting, social identity, and self-categorization // Social identity at work: Developing theory for organizational practice / Eds. S.A. Haslam et al. N.Y.: Psychology Press, 2003. P. 43–59.
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library