Health

Study of the Day: When Teamwork Isn't Democratic, Everyone Benefits

By Hans Villarica
Saved Stories

New research in Psychological Science suggests that certain group compositions may lead to elevated levels of conflict and inefficiency.

Study of the DayStockLite/Shutterstock

PROBLEM: Though many believe that equality within a team is important, does this flat power structure really improve a group's performance?

METHODOLOGY: Researchers led by Richard Ronay randomly assigned 138 undergraduate students to one of three experimental conditions -- primed to feel high in power, low in power, and baseline or control. They organized subjects into same-sex teams of three high-power participants and three low-power participants or groups with one high-power, one low-power, and one baseline participant. They then measured the teams' performance in a task that required group interdependence wherein each member was required to make words from 16 letters and then work as a group to combine the words into as many sentences as possible. They also measured how the groups fared on a second task that did not require subjects to coordinate their efforts.

RESULTS: The groups with hierarchies were more productive than the teams with either all high-power or all low-power members. This hierarchy benefit was evident when group members were required to work on a task together, but not when they were working alone.

CONCLUSION: A built-in hierarchy helps a team work effectively on collaborative tasks.

IMPLICATION: When there are too many leaders or too few followers, group performance suffers as members jostle to take control. The authors say in a statement that a clear power structure and division of labor can reduce group conflicts and improve productivity.

SOURCE: The full study, "The Path to Glory Is Paved With Hierarchy: When Hierarchical Differentiation Increases Group Effectiveness," is published in the journal Psychological Science.