GROUP PERFORMANCE

Group Performance

Group Performance

Introduction

An effective group expected to perform to the extent that is greater than the sum of the individuals' performance. This is especially true when group members perform a conjunctive and highly interdependent task, with a single output, and where the performance of the group potentially measured by the poorest group member's performance along with that of the other group-mates as occurs in interactive sports groups such as soccer, basketball. According to social and economic exchange theory, group effectiveness could result from interaction, coordination, and collaboration between the group members. Furthermore, social exchange theory explains social change as a process of negotiating exchanges between parties. By seeing trust as a primary variable in these exchanges and if I also consider the norm of reciprocity. I will attempt to examine the exchange through which trust in different organizational actors (other group players, the coach, and the top management) translates into more effective behaviour that helps the group perform better through processes such as cohesion (Vroom 2007 ,p. 17). Positive feelings and perceptions regarding one actor (e.g., the coach, group-mates, and top management) as well as positive expectations about her/his goodwill engender an obligation on the part of employees to reciprocate.

Positive Cycle Of Reinforcement

As such, a positive cycle of reinforcement takes place thanks to the dynamic relationship within the group. This implies the various actors being trustworthy while at the same time being open, reliable, and concerned for others, something which can be see in and lead to group cohesion. Group cohesion is the degree to which group members work together as they pursue the group's goals. It defines as a dynamic process that reflected to stick together. It remains united in the pursuit of its instrumental objectives and/or for the satisfaction of member affective needs. The creation of cohesion among a group strengthened when one member interprets another's words, attitudes, or actions as being reliable, honest, and containing genuine concern, thereby indicating a relationship of trust (Van 2008 ,p. 182).

As organizations increasingly rely on groups to generate the solutions required for sustained business success, there has been a surge in research on how these groups should be composed to foster high levels of performance. The interactive effect of diversity salience and mean openness to experience explained differences in performance among groups that were identical in terms of gender diversity, and information elaboration mediated this interactive effect. When rewards distributed in ways that increased gender diversity salience, mean openness to experience positively related to group performance. This relationship was non-significant when reward structures emphasized a super-ordinate identity and thus decreased the salience of gender differences. Importantly, our study differs from this prior research in a number of significant ways.

Several authors have argued that the diversity-group outcome relationship can best be understood by considering both the information/decision-making perspective, which predicts positive effects of diversity, and the social categorization perspective, which posits negative effects of diversity. Collective group identification reflects the motivation and commitment of the group members to overcome any disruptive ...