Page 137 - Effective group discussion theory and practice by Adams, Katherine H. Brilhart, John K. Galanes, Gloria J

120 Chapter 5

found that both agreeableness and conscientiousness were related positively to team
performance. For agreeableness, both the minimum and average scores were related
28
to performance. The authors suggest that this dimension is equivalent to the relation-
ship element of group work. This makes sense, because agreeableness intuitively seems
like a necessary component for collaborating with other people. By definition, group
work emphasizes interpersonal interaction among members. Agreeable people are easy
to work with and do not intentionally provoke defensiveness in others.
Halfhill and colleagues suggested that the task element of group work is repre-
sented by conscientiousness. The minimum level of conscientiousness correlated with
group performance but the average level did not, perhaps because the average level for
all groups studied was already fairly high. Interestingly, the more spread out members
were on the conscientiousness factor, the worse a group’s performance. Group mem-
bers expect a certain bottom-line level of individual effort and performance. When
members are not performing as expected, task conflict is likely to arise, which can
hurt a group’s overall performance. Bradley and his associates studied agreeableness
and its relationship to performance. They discovered that agreeableness in face-to-
29
face groups led to better communication and higher cohesiveness, which improved
performance. Interestingly, the effect did not hold for virtual groups. These authors
postulate that interpersonal trust—fostered by agreeableness—is less important in vir-
tual groups than is appropriate information exchange.
Peeters and her associates likewise found agreeableness and conscientiousness
positively related to performance. These researchers studied 26 interdisciplinary stu-
30
dent design teams charged with creating a robot that would perform certain tasks. In
the concept phase of the design process, students had to figure out what they were
going to do and agree on the concept. In the elaboration phase, students actually had
to develop and build the robot based on the concept. Both agreeableness and consci-
Openness to
Experience entiousness were important factors. Agreeable people can more easily understand and
combine one another’s ideas, which allows the process to go smoothly. Conscientious
Refers to individuals
who are imaginative people pay attention to scheduling, monitoring the group’s performance, and making
and creative, and sure everything gets done on time. It is easy to see why both factors are important.
who are eager to Another important factor in team effectiveness is openness to experience, which
31
explore refers to behavior that is imaginative, creative, and intellectually curious. As might
unconventional be expected, Schilpzand and her colleagues found that openness to experience is sig-
ideas. nificantly related to team creativity. This is important because organizations increas-
32
ingly rely on teams for innovation. To be creative, teams need to be willing to explore
unconventional ideas, challenge their assumptions, and “think outside the box.”
Neuroticism Teams composed of members open to experience are likely to be more original, to
Refers to individuals combine ideas in novel ways, and to be more flexible. The researchers found that a
who regularly diversity of openness was actually more important than having all highly open mem-
experience negative bers in a group. They speculate that the less-open members provide grounding neces-
emotions such as sary to bring a task to completion.
anxiety and fear and The fifth personality dimension, neuroticism, is the tendency of individuals to
respond to stress in
antagonistic or experience negative emotions such as anxiety and fear, which leads them to behave in
33
hostile ways. antagonistic or hostile ways when stressed. This factor, also, has been associated with
group behavior. Roberge, Xu, and Rousseau studied group interpersonal citizenship

gal37018_ch05_109_134.indd 120 3/28/18 12:35 PM