Do My Contributions Matter? The Influence of Imputed Expertise on Member Involvement and Self-Evaluations in the Work Group

Abstract

Exploiting the diversity of expertise in a work team is a critical factor in maximizing group performance. This article attempts to assess several sources of influence on group member perceptions regarding the value of their input to the group as well as the level of member involvement in group activity. The participants selected for this study were 216 university students (108 men, 108 women) who were randomly assigned to 36 mixed-gender groups. Groups were required to generate a negotiation strategy for two business-related cases. Measures of individual interaction styles were provided by expert judges who viewed videotapes of the group discussions and observed member behavior. Participants completed questionnaires that assessed selfevaluations of their contributions to the group’s efforts. The findings of this study offer striking evidence that imputed expertise can clearly affect group member perceptions and behavior.

The role of star performers in software design teams

“…experts) are more actively involved in interpersonal interactions. Empirical findings support the assumption that experts are more engaged in the group's activities compared to other group members: Experts have been shown to mention and repeat more information, to be more central in groups, and to put emphasis on specific aspects of knowledge (Bunderson, 2003;Faraj and Sproull, 2000;Karakowsky and McBey, 2001). In accordance with these findings, we propose that the experts in task functions should significantly predict team performance beyond the average performance score in task functions.…”

Group assessments: dilemmas facing lecturers in multicultural tertiary classrooms

“…There is much research to support the contention that group work, or co-operative learning, is an effective tool for improving academic performance (Johnston & Miles, 2004;Karakowsky & McBey, 2001;Johnson, Johnson & Smith, 1998a, 1998bLejk, Wyvill & Farrow, 1997;Zhining, Johnson & Johnson, 1995). Researchers argue that students are involved in tasks that could not be attempted alone; multiple skills are brought to bear on problems and conflicting views are aired and considered (Young & Henquinet, 2000;McCorkle, Reardon, Alexander, Kling, Harris & Iyer, 1999;Gatfield, 1999).…”

Why people resort to coercion: the role of utility and legitimacy

“…First, group members often assume that the more controlling and assertive group members are the most expert (Bunderson, 2003;Littlepage & Mueller, 1997;Littlepage & Silbiger, 1992), and that they deem others' competence as inferior to their own (Tepper, Eisenbach, Kirby, & Potter, 1998). Second, more competent group members participate more actively in group tasks (Karakowsky & McBey, 2001;Ridgeway, Johnson, & Diekema, 1994), are more influential in group decisions (Oldmeadow, Platow, Foddy, & Anderson, 2003;Skvoretz, 1985), and use (coercive) power tactics more often than less competent group members (de Gilder & Wilke, 1994;van Knippenberg, van Eijbergen, & Wilke, 1999;van Knippenberg, van Knippenberg, & Wilke, 2001).…”