Search results

This paper theorizes the role of shared responsibility in the development of affective group attachments, interweaving ideas from social exchange and social identity theories. The main arguments are that (1) people engaged in task interaction experience positive or negative emotions from those interactions; (2) tasks that promote more sense of shared responsibility across members lead people to attribute their individual emotions to groups or organizations; and (3) group attributions of own emotions are the basis for stronger or weaker group attachments. The paper suggests that social categorization and structural interdependence promote group attachments by producing task interactions that have positive emotional effects on those involved.

Substantial developmental psychology research on attachment theory documents that children with secure affectional ties (attachments) to caregivers are more likely to excel in psychosocial and behavioral performance than their peers with insecure attachments. We review attachment theory and research in the developmental psychology literature and propose causes of secure short-term attachments to workgroups. Whereas traditional attachment research has documented social–emotional antecedents, we propose social–emotional and task-related antecedents of secure attachment to workgroups. Suggestive data are presented to illustrate our propositions. We discuss theoretical and practical contributions of our attachment theory-based perspective on workgroups, as well as areas for future research.

In this chapter we apply intergroup emotion theory (IET; Mackie, Devos, & Smith, 2000) to reflect on the conditions under which individuals may experience intergroup emotions in workgroups, and to explore some possible consequences of those emotions. First, we briefly outline IET and describe the psychological mechanisms underlying intergroup emotion with a particular emphasis on the role of social identification. Second, we describe some of the antecedents of shared and varied social identifications in workgroups, which may in turn elicit shared or varied intergroup emotions in workgroups. Finally, we consider potential consequences for both relationship and task outcomes such as organizational citizenship behavior, workgroup cohesion, relationship and task conflict, issue interpretation, and information sharing.

In this chapter, we attempt to better understand the mechanisms underlying the effects of process conflict on team performance by exploring the role of negative affect in explaining the negative effects of process conflict on performance. Our findings show that negative affect does fully mediate the relationship between process conflict and group performance. Additionally, we investigate a set of conditions relating to fairness concerns and group context, which may have an influence on the relationship between process conflict and negative affect. We find that when voice is high and perceived goal obstruction and subgroup existence are low, the relationship between process conflict and negative affect is ameliorated, thus allowing for more positive effects of process conflict to emerge.

We report on research that investigated the emotional mediation of leader behavior on observers’ affinity for the members of a leader's group. Participants (N=181) read a vignette describing the positive, negative, or neutral behaviors of a national leader, and the approval or disapproval of that leader's followers for that behavior. Results revealed that liking (i.e., allophilia) for the leader's followers decreased when the group leader behaved negatively and group members expressed approval for their leader. These changes in allophilia were mediated by the amount of anger experienced by the participant. Implications of these findings for future work on leadership and intergroup relations are discussed.

Understanding the impact of diversity on group process and performance has been the focus of much research, yet there are still unanswered questions about how diversity impacts group process and performance. One factor that is clearly a consequence of group composition is affective tone. In this chapter, we discuss the impact of diversity and homogeneity on affective responses from group members and argue that the relatively negative affective tone experienced in diverse groups may fuel more systematic information processing and improve decision-making performance. The implications for managing both positive and negative affect in groups will be considered.

We propose that group affective tone may be dysfunctional for teams faced with complex, equivocal, and dynamically changing tasks and environments. Group affective tone (and in particular, a positive affective tone) may exacerbate pre-existing tendencies of teams to develop a single-shared reality that team members confidently believe to be valid and to be prone to group-centrism. Alternatively, heterogeneity in member mood states within teams may lead to the development of multiple-shared realities that reflect the equivocality of the teams’ tasks and circumstances and other functional outcomes (e.g., multiple perspectives and minority dissent), which ultimately may enhance team effectiveness.

This chapter examines how emotional intelligence may influence the performance of groups. I first address relevant issues concerning emotional intelligence at the individual level of analysis. I then describe the range of composition models by which group emotional intelligence constructs can be created, from the emotional intelligence of the members of the group, articulate mechanisms by which each construct may be related to performance, and use Steiner's (1972) typology of group tasks to identify when each construct may best predict performance. I also use the mechanisms of multiplication and compensation to consider how group emotional intelligence may combine with other group constructs to predict performance. I end this chapter with a discussion of research implications.

This chapter develops and tests a theory on relationships between perceptions of ability and adherence to rules, guidelines, and tradition. Drawing from theory and research on status processes in groups, the theory proposes that adherence to rules can provide an alternative to task ability in demonstrating competence at a group task and that persons who perceive themselves to be low in ability will become especially likely to strictly adhere to rules.

In an experimental study, participants received feedback that they had high or low ability at a group task that involved making judgments about bonuses in a fictitious organization.

Supporting the theory, participants who perceived themselves to be low in ability gave less money to employees technically ineligible for raises, even when the reason for the ineligibility was arguably trivial.

The proposed theory and supportive results have a number of theoretical implications for how status processes shape individual behavior in groups. For example, the theory might help explain collective enforcement against free riding, with people low in ability being motivated to enforce norms against free riding to compensate for their perceived lack of ability to contribute.

It is easy to conjure examples in which persons who are seen as exceptionally competent also seem to be given wide leniency in adhering to rules. The theory and experimental test presented here can help in understanding the extent to which the following of rules may be seen as the domain of the incompetent.