Member competence, group interaction, and group decision making: a longitudinal study

Article Abstract:

The primary objective of this study was to examine the extent to which increased experience in working in a group would affect group versus individual problem solving. The duration and intensity of group involvement for subjects (over 30 hr) was extensive. In addition, the reward system provided a clear and direct tie between individual or group performance and a significant outcome (i.e., course grades). The decision-making task had a great deal in common with many of the aspects of group decision making in organizations. Results were overwhelmingly in favor of group decision making across time, given this type of task. The percentage by which the group performance score was higher (or lower) than the group's best member was called the group added value (GAV). In addition, a synergy ratio was developed in an attempt to measure how much a group added over their best member's contributions. Best members rarely repeated as the top scorer and became less important tp group success as the group gained experience. The results call into question much of the previous group decision-making research and strongly support the value of group-consensus decision making both in task forces and ongoing organizational groups. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Performance, Problem solving, Interpersonal relations, Social interaction

---

A realistic test of individual versus group consensus decision making

Article Abstract:

Nearly all research on the accuracy of individual versus group decision making has used ad hoc groups, artificial problems, and trivial or nonexistent reward contingencies. These studies have generally concluded that the knowledge base of the most competent group member appears to be the practical upper limit of group performance and that process gains will rarely be achieved. We studied individual versus group decision making by using data from 222 project teams, ranging in size from 3 to 8 members. These teams were engaged in solving contextually relevant and consequential problems and, in direct contrast with previous research, the groups outperformed their most proficient group member 97% of the time. Furthermore, 40% of the process gains could not be explained by either average or most knowledgeable group member scores. Implications for management practice are also discussed. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Decision-making, Decision making, Management, Industrial psychology, Industrial-organizational psychology

---

Group decision making: how you frame the question determines what you find

Article Abstract:

Though not arguing against the practical value of decision making per se, Tindale and Larson (1992) used data from computer simulations and an eight-group replication study as a basis for questioning the validity of the findings reported by Michaelson, Watson, and Black (1989). We show that the application of computer simulations is suspect, that their replication-study data is so limited that its significance is questionable, that their operational definition of an assembly bonus effect is restrictive to the point that it has little meaning in real-world settings, and that their claims with respect to the performance of ad hoc laboratory groups are inflated and misleading. (Reprinted by permission of the publisher.)

Criticism and interpretation, Group problem solving, Tindale, R. Scott, Larson, James R., Jr.

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: The incubator. Group absenteeism and positive affective tone: a longitudinal study
• Abstracts: Referent cognitions and task decision autonomy: beyond equity theory. Perceived fairness of employee drug testing as a predictor of employee attitudes and job performance
• Abstracts: The stepladder technique: an alternative group structure facilitating effective group decision making. Behaviorally anchored bias: a replication and extension of Murphy and Constans
• Abstracts: The criterion problem: 1917 - 1992. Suppressing illusory halo with forced-choice items

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.