Five Years of Groups Research: What We Have Learned and What Needs to Be Addressed

Abstract

This article reports the principal findings of over 250 studies published between January, 1986 and October, 1989 that address the dynamics of small social groups. The reviewed work falls into four broad areas that together provide insight and knowledge of group behavior Studies in the first section explore the fundamental tension between individuals and groups, how group members form a common understanding of their world, and how groups develop and change over time. The second section examines how the group's interaction context, (i.e., its structure, technology environment, size, and composition) affects group processes and outcomes. The third and fourth sections summarize the recent findings in each of seven areas of traditional interest in social psychology: group polarization, social influence, social loafing, group cohesion, commitment, conflict, and goal setting. Finally, research that specifically addresses work group effectiveness, self-managed teams, quality circles and team building interventions is summarized and discussed. Trends and areas of managerial interest that deserve further research attention are identified throughout this review; the areas of greatest practical concern are summarized in afinal section.

Social reference: Toward a unifying theory

“…Many frameworks of team effectiveness exist (e.g., Cohen, & Bailey, 1997;Hackman & Oldham, 1980;Shea & Guzzo, 1987;Pearce & Ravlin, 1987;Sundstrom, DeMuese, & Futrell, 1990). McGrath (1964McGrath ( ,1984, Bettenhausen (1991), Guzzo and Dickson (1996), Cohen and Bailey (1997), Rousseau, Aube and Savoie (2006), and Mathieu, Maynard, Rapp, & Gilson (2008) reviewed the literature and described relevant frameworks and variables that contribute to team effectiveness. Those relevant for online social reference include self-regulating work groups (Pearce & Ravlin, 1987) and the self-managing work team model (Cohen, Ledford, & Spreitzer, 1996) because of the nature of group collaboration that is typical of Q&A sites.…”

The effects of team training on team outcomes: A meta-analysis

“…Also, members of intact teams may have stronger affective bonds than members of ad hoc teams. Long-standing positive or negative affect between team members can influence how well or how poorly they work together on a task (Barrick, Stewart, Neubert, & Mount, 1998;Bettenhausen, 1991;Mullen & Copper, 1994;Zaccaro & McCoy, 1988). However, because members of ad hoc teams may lack understanding of each other's KSAs, they may not have an adequate basis to trust one another and may have difficulty learning to rely on one another during team training episodes.…”

Creating Hybrid Team Cultures: An Empirical Test of Transnational Team Functioning.

“…For example, effective groups often display shared conceptions of their expectations and rules (Bettenhausen, 1991;Hackman, 1987). A team mental model (Klimoski & Mohammed, 1994) is a shared psychological representation of a team's environment constructed to permit "sense-making" and guide appropriate group action (Elron et al, 1998).…”