Summary 4.2 Groups at work Problem #2

4.2 #2 LG1: What is the relationship between team size & team outcome?
What is the effect of team size?

Aube, Rousseau, & Tremblay, 2011 - Team Size & Quality of Group Experience

Method:
- 97 2-9-member teams with 341 members in public safety sector
- Questionnaires

Results:
- Team size negatively related to quality of group experience (H1)
- Team size positively related to parasitic behaviors (H2)
 Parasitism: behaviors that involve getting other team members to do one’s work
 negatively related to quality of group experience (H6)
 mediates relationship between team size & quality of group experience
(H10)
- Team size positively related to interpersonal aggressive behaviors (H3)
 Interpersonal aggression: detrimental physical or psychological behavior towards other
 negatively related to quality of group experience (H7)
 mediates relationship between team size & quality of group experience
(H11)
- Team size positively relates to boastful behaviors (H4)
 Boastfulness: exaggerating one’s own contributions compared to teammates
 negatively related to quality of group experience (H8)
 mediates relationship between team size & quality of group experience
(H12)
- Team size positively relates to behaviors associated with misuse of resources (H5)
 Misuse of resources: inappropriate use of material & equipment
 Does not negatively relate to quality of group experience (H9X positive: .24;
may be explained by considering misuse of resources as an outlet for team
members’ frustration without directly affecting interactions with teammates)
 mediates relationship between team size & quality of group experience
(H13)

Discussion:
- Relationship between team size & quality of group experience is indirect 
counterproductive behaviors may intervene as mediators
 The more members there are in a team, the more likely the team is to encounter problems
with its functioning and its outcomes
- Implications:
 Managers would benefit by conducting task analyses to build teams that do not include
more than the number of members required to efficiently perform the work




1

, 4.2 #2 LG1: What is the relationship between team size & team outcome?
What is the effect of team size?

Hoegl, 2005 - How to keep project teams small

Teamwork:
- Team performance depends on its ability to work in an interactive mode to achieve a common
team output
- Performance-relevant team processes include task-related & social elements:
 Teamwork can be assessed by considering 6 facets of collaborative work process:
communication, coordination, balance of member contributions, mutual support,
effort, & cohesion

Team size effect: Team size ↑
 Difficulty of knowledge sharing ↑
 complexity of communication structure ↑
 social loafing ↑
 nonparticipating members ↑

There is no optimal team size: team size must be determined with respect to
- staffing requirements, deriving from the size of the project task, &
- teamwork requirements, deriving from task complexity & uncertainty

Ways to keep project teams small (while providing necessary knowledge & personnel capacity):
1. Create a multiteam project: larger projects should be assigned to several small teams
(subprojects) with their own quality, schedule, & budget objectives
2. Core team versus extended team: rather than having representatives from various organizational
groups be included as formal team members, it is better to establish a core team of individuals
that are necessary for task completion to work directly & interactively together on the project
 The remaining individuals outside of the core team may take roles of consulting or
advisory members, who are informed on a regular basis and can provide input as needed
3. Define team-external contributions: specific tasks & contributions toward project completion
can be identified for team-external individuals or groups to provide, rather than including those
individuals or groups within the team itself (outsource work)
4. Project phase-specific team members: keep team members on board during the project phases for
which they are needed, rather than carrying them on the team throughout the whole project



Cohen & Bailey, 1997

Past research suggests that size has a curvilinear or inverted U-shaped relation to effectiveness such that
too few or too many members reduce performance
- BUT 2 studies found that increasing group size actually improved performance without limit
 Benefits of increasing team size: larger teams imply fewer teams within a firm, thus
 fewer leaders must be trained
 less coordination is required among teams,
 fewer team proposals must be reviewed by steering & oversight committees
 imply that the U-shaped relationship between size and effectiveness may not hold for all types
of teams in organizational settings




2