Complex interdependence in task-performing groups.

Abstract

This study proposed a model of work group performance based on the consequences of complex interdependence (CI), which is denned as the interactive effects of task, goal, and feedback combinations. The study consisted of a 4 (task interdependence: pooled, sequential, reciprocal, or team) X 2 (goal interdependence: individual or group) X 2 (feedback interdependence: individual or group) completely crossed factorial design using 118 three-person groups working in a laboratory setting on a performance appraisal task. The results of group-level analyses demonstrated the impact of CI on the perceived effectiveness of group task strategy. In turn, task strategy and intragroup conflict partially mediated the effects of CI on group performance quantity and quality. Design applications for group work are presented and discussed.According to McGrath (1984), an assessment of any group performance situation begins with the nature of the task. If the work is to be done by a group, then its members should be organized in ways that promote effective performance given the demands of the task. Design decisions intended to capitalize on the synergistic possibilities of group work should begin with a general premise advanced by Cartwright and Zander (1968): "A group is a collection of individuals who have relations to one another that make them interdependent to some significant degree" (p. 46). In a work group situation, task interdependence stems from the requirements and constraints inherent in the group's task (Goodman, 1986). Given the expanding use of groups in organizations (Barley, 1990;Hackman, 1990), it is increasingly important to understand the impact of different forms of interdependence on group processes and outcomes.Task interdependence is the degree to which group members must rely on one another to perform their tasks effectively given the design of their jobs (Georgopoulos, 1986;Kiggundu, 1981Kiggundu, , 1983. Put another way, task interdependence refers to the interconnections among the tasks of group members (Van de Yen & Ferry, 1980). Most research on task-performing groups acknowledges the role of task interdependence. For example, task interdependence affects the level of cooperation within a group (Shaw, 1973) as well as a group's ability to prevent a loss in productivity (Steiner, 1972). Task interdependence also influences group performance (Shea & Guzzo, 1987) and the nature of interpersonal interactions among work group members (Gersick,

The effect of functional roles on perceived group efficiency during computer-supported collaborative learning: a matter of triangulation

“…Intra-group conflict (α = .80; 7 items) provides the perceived level of conflict between group members and task strategy (α = .86; 8 items) indicates whether students perceive that their group deployed an appropriate strategy for the given task (both cf. Saavedra, Early, & Van Dyne, 1993;translated into Dutch). In addition students were requested to answer about twenty open-ended questions (opportunities for extended feedback).…”

Effects of representational guidance during computer-supported collaborative learning

“…The final scale addressed students' perceived effectiveness of their group's task strategies. This scale was based on the work of Saavedra et al (1993) and consisted of eight items that assessed the choices made and the strategies chosen by the group members. Again, these items were rated on a 5-point scale.…”

Empowering the project team: impact of leadership style and team context

“…Interdependence in team settings reflects the extent to which team members need to mutually interact, communicate and coordinate to accomplish tasks (Saavedra et al, 1993). Steiner (1972) characterized interdependence as process interaction while Thompson (1967) conceptualized it in terms of work-flow processes and proposed three basic work-flow arrangements or task interdependence reflecting an increasing level of dependence and need for coordination; pooled, sequential and reciprocal interdependence.…”