Individual- and group-level consequences of divergence in perceived group affect

Abstract

The shared mood or affect of a work group can exert a powerful influence on the group’s social dynamics and effectiveness. However, the mood of others can be difficult to read, leading to divergent perceptions of group affect among members. What happens when individuals perceive the group’s affect differently? We answer this question by investigating how divergence in perceptions of group affect influences individuals’ social integration and the group’s performance. In doing so, we examine the implications of divergence in perceived group affect for individuals and the group as a whole. In a field study of 1,419 individuals in 107 work groups, we found that divergence in perceptions of the group’s positive affect was negatively associated with individuals’ commitment to the team and undermined the positive impact of group affect on group performance. We discuss the implications of our findings for refining theory on group affect, the value of strongly shared affect, and how leaders can foster a stronger sense of shared affect within groups.

Socially shared affect: Shared affect, affect sharing, and affective processing in groups.

“…The degree of shared affect can impact group members' perceived similarity in groups, which in turn relates to numerous benefits, ranging from interpersonal satisfaction (Sacco et al, 2014), commitment to build stable and long-term relationships (Baumeister & Leary, 1995), and group identification (Leach et al, 2008). Jeong and Korsgaard (2022) found that dissimilarity in perceived positive affect among team members reduced team members' commitment. When groups have high levels of shared positive affect, they are likely to engage in positive behavioral processes such as social integration, coordination, helping, and eventually promote group adaptability, viability, and performance.…”

“…For example, homogeneity of team positive affect positively relates to team effectiveness indicators of team situation awareness, cognitive resource management, information exchange, and crew collaboration (Kaplan et al, 2013). Jeong and Korsgaard (2022) demonstrated that the relationships between team performance and the team's mean level of positive affect were stronger when positive affect was shared in the teams. This finding illustrates that socially shared affect can have both direct (mediator) and indirect (moderator) influences on measures of group effectiveness, and that complex relationships might be expected as socially shared affect is considered for other group outcomes.…”

TMT entrepreneurial passion diversity and firm innovation performance: the mediating role of knowledge creation

“…For example, De Mol et al (2020) find that overall affect in the form of average team entrepreneurial passion has limited impact on team performance, and instead, diversity in positive affect of passion can undermine team performance. In addition, the divergence (or convergence) of levels of shared positive feelings is the most important facet of team passion and has been the main focus of research into team emotional dynamics, taking precedence over the average levels of feelings (Astakhova et al , 2022; Jeong and Korsgaard, 2022). Based on prior work, the present study focuses on passion diversity, “the with-in group variance between individual team members and their individual passions” (Cardon et al , 2017b, p. 285), as the primary characteristic of TMT entrepreneurial passion that shapes the knowledge creation process and innovation performance of firms.…”

At The Heart of Digital Collaboration: Navigating Interpersonal Affective Pathways in Digitalized Work Environments

“…Emotions are sometimes divided into discrete categories, such as joy, sadness, anger, fear, surprise, and disgust . These categories can be hard to disentangle from context-specific psychological processes , and so many studies of team affect adopt Russell's (1980) two-dimensional model of emotion, which distinguishes emotions by the extent to which they are positive or negative, and the extent to which they are exciting/agitating or calming/soothing (e.g., Jeong & Korsgaard, 2022;Knight, 2015).…”

“…Although affective convergence often emerges naturally in groups due to mood contagion , past research indicates that this process can be counteracted by a range of factors, resulting in members feeling differently from one another (cf. Jeong & Korsgaard, 2022). For example, the shared environment of a physical office space can stimulate affective convergence by increasing mutual understanding, shared norms, and coordination (Hinds & Mortensen, 2005) and by creating a shared vantage point .…”