Adult members of 68 ongoing small groups evaluated their peers' functional role behaviors (i.e., task, maintenance, individual) in classroom settings. These three role categories generally emerged from these group ratings and were interrelated as predicted. Group members who played task roles also tended to play maintenance roles. Individual role behaviors were largely unrelated to task role adoption but were inversely associated with maintenance role behaviors. Perceptions of group cohesiveness were positively linked with both task and maintenance role activity but were lowest among individual role players. Task roles were seen as valuable and as contributing to the group effort, whereas both maintenance and individual roles were viewed neutrally in this regard. Implications of these results for both researchers and group members are addressed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ancona, D. G. , & Caldwell, D. F. (1988). Beyond task and maintenance: Defining external functions in groups. Group and Organization Studies, 13, 468-494.
2.
Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A methodfor the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Bales, R. F. (1953). The equilibrium problem in small groups. In T. Parsons, R. F. Bales, & E. A. Shils (Eds.), Working papers in the theory of action (pp. 111-161). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
4.
Bales, R. F. (1958). Task roles and social roles in problem-solving groups. In E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 437-447). New York: Holt, Rinhart, & Winston.
5.
Bales, R. F. (1970). Personality and interpersonal behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
6.
Bales, R. F. (1988). A new overview of the SYMLOG system: Measuring and changing behavior in groups. In R. B. Polley, A. P. Hare, & P. J. Stone (Eds.), The SYMLOG practitioner: Applications of small group research (pp. 319-344). New York: Praeger.
7.
Bales, R. F , & Cohen, S. P. (1979). SYMLOG: A system for the multiple level observation of groups. New York: Free Press.
8.
Bales, R. F. , & Slater, P. E. (1955). Role differentiation in small decision-making groups. In T. Parsons & R. F. Bales (Eds.), Family, socialization, and interaction process (pp. 259-306). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
9.
Benne, K. D. , & Sheats, P. (1948). Functional roles of group members. Journal of Social Issues, 4, 41-49.
10.
Berger, J. , & Conner, T. L. (1969). Performance expectations and behavior in small groups. Acta Sociologica, 12, 186-198.
11.
Cartwright, D. (1968). The nature of group cohesiveness. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamics: Research and theory (3rd ed., pp. 91-109). New York: Harper & Row.
12.
Cohen, J. , & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Denfy, R. (1989). An empirical study of moral reasoning among managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 855-862.
14.
Deutsch, M. (1949). An experimental study of the effects of co-operation and competition upon group process. Hwnan Relations, 2, 199-231.
15.
Dobbins, G. H. , & Zaccaro, S. J. (1986). The effects of group cohesion and leader behavior on subordinate satisfaction. Group and Organization Studies, 11, 203-219.
16.
Driver, M. J. , & Hunsaker, P. L. (1972). The Luna I moon colony: A programrmed simulation for the analysis of individual and group decision maldng. Psychological Reports, 31, 879-888.
17.
Dukerich, J. M. , Nichols, M. L., Elm, D. R., & Vollrath, D. A. (1990). Moral reasoning in groups: Leaders make a difference. Human Relations, 43, 473-493.
18.
Evans, C. R. , & Dion, K. L. (1991). Group cohesionand performance: Ameta-analysis. Small Group Research, 22, 175-186.
19.
Farh, J.-L. , Cannella, A. A., Jr., & Bedeian, A. G. (1991). Peer ratings: The impact of purpose on rating quality and user acceptance. Group and Organization Studies, 16, 367-386.
20.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: Amodel of task group effectiveness.Ad,ninistrativeScience Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
21.
Goodman, P. S. , Ravlin, E., & Schminke, M. (1987). Understanding groups in organizations. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 121-173). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
22.
Greene, C. N. (1989). Cohesion and productivity in work groups. Small Group Behavior, 20, 70-86.
23.
Hersey, P. , & Blanchard, K. H. (1977). Management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
24.
Kabanoff, B. (1987). Predictive validity of the MODE conflict instrument. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 72, 160-163.
25.
Keyton, J. , & Springston, J. (1990). Redefining cohesiveness in groups. Small Group Research, 21, 234-254.
26.
Lord, R. G. (1977). Functional leadership behavior: Measurement and relation to social power and leadership perceptions. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 114-133.
27.
Lustig, M. W. (1987). Bales's interpersonal rating forms: Reliability and dimensionality. Small Group Behavior, 18, 99-107.
28.
Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationships between personality and performance in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241-270.
29.
Manning, F. J. , & Fullerton, T. D. (1988). Health and well-being in highly cohesive units of the U.S. Army. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 503-519.
30.
McGrath, J. E. (1991). Time, interaction, and performance (TIP): A theory of groups. Small Group Research, 22, 147-174.
31.
McGrath, J. E. , Arrow, H., Gruenfeld, D. H., Hollingshead, A. B., & O'Connor, K. M. (1993). Groups, tasks, and technology: The effects of experience and change. Small Group Research, 24, 406-420.
32.
Medcof, J. W. (1990). The need for dominance scale of the Manifest Needs Questionnaire: Its reliability and validity. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 39, 307-322.
33.
Mischel, W. (1977). The interaction of person and situation. In D. Magnusson & N. S. Endler (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology (pp. 333-352). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
Monson, T. C. , Hesley, J. W., & Chernick, L. (1982). Specifying when personality traits can and cannot predict behavior: An alternative to abandoning the attempt to predict single act criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 385-399.
35.
Mudrack, P. E. (1989a). Defining group cohesiveness: A legacy of confusion?Small Group Behavior, 20, 37-49.
36.
Mudrack, P. E. (1989b). Group cohesiveness and productivity: A closer look. Human Relations, 42, 771-785.
37.
Organ, D. W. (1988). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome, Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
38.
Pedhazur, E. J. (1982). Multiple regression in behavioral research (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
39.
Polley, R. B. (1987). The dimensions of social interaction: A method for improving rating scales. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 72-82.
40.
Polley, R. B. (1989). On the dimensionality of interpersonal behavior: A reply to Lustig. Small Group Behavior, 20, 270-278.
41.
Roark, A. E. , & Sharah, H. S. (1989). Factors related to group cohesiveness. Small Group Behavior, 20, 62-69.
42.
Schein, E. H. (1969). Process consultation: Its role in organization development. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
43.
Schriesheim, C. , & Kerr, S. (1974). Psychometric properties of the Ohio State leadership scales. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 756-765.
44.
Schriesheim, J. F. (1980). The social context of leader-subordinate relations: An investigation of the effects of group cohesiveness. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 65, 183-194.
45.
Steers, R. M. (1991). Introduction to organizational behavior (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
46.
Stein, R. T. , & Heller, T. (1979). An empirical analysis of the correlations between leadership status and participation rates reported in the literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1993-2002.
47.
Swann, H. , & Polley, R. B. (1985). On forming impressions from observed behavior: Two postulates and five parameters. International Journal of Small Group Research, 1, 206-214.
48.
Wagner, D. G. , & Berger, J. (1993). Status characteristics theory: The growth of a program. In J. Berger & M. Zelditch, Jr. (Eds.), Theoretical research programs: Studies in the growth of theory (pp. 23-63). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
49.
Weiss, H. M. , & Adler, S. (1984). Personality and organizational behavior. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 1-50). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
50.
Widmeyer, W. N. , & Williams, J. M. (1991). Predicting cohesion in a coacting sport. Small Group Research, 22, 548-570.
51.
Zaccaro, S. J. (1991). Nonequivalent associations between forms of cohesiveness and group-related outcomes: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 387-399.
52.
Zaccaro, S. J. , & Dobbins, G. H. (1989). Contrasting group and organizational commitment: Evidence for differences among multilevel attachments. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 10, 267-273.
53.
Zaccaro, S. J. , & Lowe, C. A. (1988). Cohesiveness and performance on an additive task: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 547-558.
54.
Zaccaro, S. J. , & McCoy, M. C. (1988). The effects of task and interpersonal cohesiveness on performance of a disjunctive group task. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 837-851.
55.
Zander, A. (1979). The psychology of group processes. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 417-451). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
