Friends With Performance Benefits: A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Friendship and Group Performance

Abstract

The current article examines if, and under which conditions, there exists a positive relationship between working with friends and group performance. To do so, using data from 1,016 groups obtained from 26 studies, we meta-analyzed comparisons of the performance of friendship groups versus acquaintance groups. Results show that friendship has a significant positive effect on group task performance (Cohen's d = 0.31). Furthermore, this relationship was moderated by group size (i.e., the positive effect of friendship on performance increased with group size) and task focus (i.e., friendship groups performed better than acquaintance groups on tasks requiring a high quantity of output, whereas there was no performance benefit on tasks requiring a single or high-quality output). These results help to reconcile mixed findings and illustrate when friendship groups are more likely to perform better than acquaintance groups.

Prediction of Group Performance: The Interplay of Individual Performance, Interpersonal Attraction, and Interpersonal Behavior

“…We found that, on average, groups performed better in the problem-solving task than the individual members did alone (see Wittenbaum et al, 2004). Our results confirmed previous findings by showing that both individual performance (e.g., Devine & Philips, 2001) and interpersonal attraction (e.g., Beal et al, 2003;Castaño et al, 2013;Chung et al, 2017) predicted group performance. Furthermore, whereas individual performance was associated only with communication, interpersonal attraction was significantly related to communication, cooperation, and conflict (and marginally significantly related to coordination).…”

“…We conducted the present study to investigate whether and how group performance could be predicted by individual performance and interpersonal attraction, and whether and how directly observed interpersonal behaviors mediate the relations between these variables on the theoretical basis of the input-process-output model. Our study extends previous research because we went beyond examining the relations between the relevant variables in isolation (e.g., Chung et al, 2017;Casey-Campbell & Martens, 2009;LePine & van Dyne, 2001;DeDreu & Weingart, 2003;Hackmann, 2002;Kozlowski & Bell, 2003). Rather, we considered all of the theoretically important variables in one study.…”

“…Concerning communication, research has shown that communicative behavior is related to both interpersonal attraction (Berscheid & Walster, 1969;Chung et al, 2017) and group outcomes (Kozlowski & Bell, 2003;Marlow, Lacerenza, Paoletti, Burke, & Salas, 2018). We propose that interpersonal attraction should increase communicative behavior and hence the amount of knowledge that is shared across group members.…”

“…Montoya and Horton (2014) defined interpersonal attraction as one person's spontaneous positive or negative evaluation of another person. In fact, a number of meta-analyses have shown that interpersonal attraction between group members is a significantly positive predictor of group performance (e.g., Beal et al, 2003;Castaño, Watts, & Teklab, 2013;Chung, Lount, Park, & Park, 2017). Furthermore, in applied psychology, cohesion, the superordinate construct of interpersonal attraction (see Festinger, 1950), has often been found to increase so that group performance can be enhanced (Casey-Campbell & Martens, 2009).…”

“…Three meta-analyses have demonstrated that relationship conflict between group members has a negative impact on group performance (DeDreu & Weingart, 2003;DeWit, Greer, & Jehn, 2012;O'Neill, Allen, & Hastings, 2013). Furthermore, relationship conflict has been found to lead to less information sharing (Chung et al, 2017), and results have hinted that interpersonal attraction could have an important influence on the connection between relationship conflict and group performance (DeWit et al, 2012).…”