Milking Productivity From Groups
photo by robert francis
An excellent post at PsyBlog on the effects of group dynamics on productivity. Basically, the more people you add to a group the less effective the group becomes when the workload is additive. One interesting study showed that when people were asked to clap or yell as loud as they could their output in a group of six or larger was 1/3rd of what it was on their own.
As the author notes, “… a group problem-solving session relies on the brains of the best people in the group - social loafing wouldn’t necessarily reduce productivity in this group as markedly.” So this doesn’t wholly apply to our knowledge businesses, but I think we can all remember times when we were guilty of this or saw it in others in a group.
The post recommends several ways to minimize the effects of social loafing, including:
- Make it known the task is important
- Foster a group identity / belonging to the group
- Make the contribution of other members well-known so as to decrease the ’sucker effect’
All good, but there are a few worth adding.
- Assign a communicator. Team construction is vital. Having a communicator on the team who’s primary job isn’t necessarily measured in output, but rather whether everyone is aware of what others are doing, is a start. His job is to make sure everyone knows the latest developments and thus implicitly communicates the accomplishments of others on the team so as to minimize the ’sucker effect’ even further.
- Frequent iteration. Apply the Agile method of software development to your team. Break large tasks down into daily or weekly deliverables. Assign the responsibility for the task to the individual. If it requires the team to collaborate it is still that individual’s responsibility to get everyone together to accomplish the assignment. Deliver something every week and iterate as required.
- Show your work. Time should be set aside for each individual to ‘present’ their contribution to the rest of the group. Even if it’s just thought starters, the contribution should be formally recognized so that it is visible to every member.
- Limit group size. Seems obvious, particularly given the graph on the PsyBlog post that shows individual effort halves in groups of 8 or more. Group dynamics expert and HBS luminary, J. Richard Hackman, found that the optimal group size is 4.6. Obviously, it depends on what you’re trying to accomplish but err on the side of too small and you’ll force everyone to shoulder more of the load.
- Relinquish ownership. Unless ownership of the project and the subsequent success or failure is fully granted to the group, individual’s will have some cover to hide behind. While the output/goal may be dictated by someone outside the group acknowledge there are many ways to arrive at the same destination. Grant the freedom to determine that path to the group and let it be known that the rewards and recognition are all theirs.
If other solutions have worked for you please leave them in the comments for others to see.
Related posts:
- Engagement: Take the First Step
- Hiring is Hard. Here’s Proof.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
