Planning and performance in small groups: Collective implementation intentions enhance group goal striving

J. Lukas Thürmer, Frank Wieber, Peter Gollwitzer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

There are two key motivators to perform well in a group: making a contribution that (a) is crucial for the group (indispensability) and that (b) the other group members recognize (identifiability). We argue that indispensability promotes setting collective ("We") goals whereas identifiability induces individual ("I") goals. Although both goals may enhance performance, they should align with different strategies. Whereas pursuing collective goals should involve more cooperation, pursuing individual goals should involve less cooperation. Two experiments support this reasoning and show that planning out collective goals with collective implementation intentions (cIIs or "We-plans") relies on cooperation but planning out individual goals with individual implementation intentions (IIs or "I-plans") does not. In Experiment 1, three-member groups first formed a collective or an individual goal and then performed a first round of a physical persistence task. Groups then either formed a respective implementation intention (cII or II) or a control plan and then performed a second round of the task. Although groups with cIIs and IIs performed better on a physical persistence task than respective control groups, only cII groups interacted more cooperatively during task performance. To confirm the causal role of these interaction processes, Experiment 2 used the same persistence task and manipulated whether groups could communicate: When communication was hindered, groups with cIIs but not groups with IIs performed worse. Communication thus qualifies as a process making cIIs effective. The present research offers a psychology of action account to small group performance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number603
JournalFrontiers in Psychology
Volume8
Issue numberAPR
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 19 2017

Fingerprint

Communication
Task Performance and Analysis
Psychology
Control Groups
Research

Keywords

  • Collective implementation intentions
  • Cooperation and interaction
  • Motivation
  • Physical persistence
  • Small group performance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

Planning and performance in small groups : Collective implementation intentions enhance group goal striving. / Thürmer, J. Lukas; Wieber, Frank; Gollwitzer, Peter.

In: Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 8, No. APR, 603, 19.04.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{46af9bf794f246c497f603c1535b8c80,
title = "Planning and performance in small groups: Collective implementation intentions enhance group goal striving",
abstract = "There are two key motivators to perform well in a group: making a contribution that (a) is crucial for the group (indispensability) and that (b) the other group members recognize (identifiability). We argue that indispensability promotes setting collective ({"}We{"}) goals whereas identifiability induces individual ({"}I{"}) goals. Although both goals may enhance performance, they should align with different strategies. Whereas pursuing collective goals should involve more cooperation, pursuing individual goals should involve less cooperation. Two experiments support this reasoning and show that planning out collective goals with collective implementation intentions (cIIs or {"}We-plans{"}) relies on cooperation but planning out individual goals with individual implementation intentions (IIs or {"}I-plans{"}) does not. In Experiment 1, three-member groups first formed a collective or an individual goal and then performed a first round of a physical persistence task. Groups then either formed a respective implementation intention (cII or II) or a control plan and then performed a second round of the task. Although groups with cIIs and IIs performed better on a physical persistence task than respective control groups, only cII groups interacted more cooperatively during task performance. To confirm the causal role of these interaction processes, Experiment 2 used the same persistence task and manipulated whether groups could communicate: When communication was hindered, groups with cIIs but not groups with IIs performed worse. Communication thus qualifies as a process making cIIs effective. The present research offers a psychology of action account to small group performance.",
keywords = "Collective implementation intentions, Cooperation and interaction, Motivation, Physical persistence, Small group performance",
author = "Th{\"u}rmer, {J. Lukas} and Frank Wieber and Peter Gollwitzer",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "19",
doi = "10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00603",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
journal = "Frontiers in Psychology",
issn = "1664-1078",
publisher = "Frontiers Media S. A.",
number = "APR",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Planning and performance in small groups

T2 - Collective implementation intentions enhance group goal striving

AU - Thürmer, J. Lukas

AU - Wieber, Frank

AU - Gollwitzer, Peter

PY - 2017/4/19

Y1 - 2017/4/19

N2 - There are two key motivators to perform well in a group: making a contribution that (a) is crucial for the group (indispensability) and that (b) the other group members recognize (identifiability). We argue that indispensability promotes setting collective ("We") goals whereas identifiability induces individual ("I") goals. Although both goals may enhance performance, they should align with different strategies. Whereas pursuing collective goals should involve more cooperation, pursuing individual goals should involve less cooperation. Two experiments support this reasoning and show that planning out collective goals with collective implementation intentions (cIIs or "We-plans") relies on cooperation but planning out individual goals with individual implementation intentions (IIs or "I-plans") does not. In Experiment 1, three-member groups first formed a collective or an individual goal and then performed a first round of a physical persistence task. Groups then either formed a respective implementation intention (cII or II) or a control plan and then performed a second round of the task. Although groups with cIIs and IIs performed better on a physical persistence task than respective control groups, only cII groups interacted more cooperatively during task performance. To confirm the causal role of these interaction processes, Experiment 2 used the same persistence task and manipulated whether groups could communicate: When communication was hindered, groups with cIIs but not groups with IIs performed worse. Communication thus qualifies as a process making cIIs effective. The present research offers a psychology of action account to small group performance.

AB - There are two key motivators to perform well in a group: making a contribution that (a) is crucial for the group (indispensability) and that (b) the other group members recognize (identifiability). We argue that indispensability promotes setting collective ("We") goals whereas identifiability induces individual ("I") goals. Although both goals may enhance performance, they should align with different strategies. Whereas pursuing collective goals should involve more cooperation, pursuing individual goals should involve less cooperation. Two experiments support this reasoning and show that planning out collective goals with collective implementation intentions (cIIs or "We-plans") relies on cooperation but planning out individual goals with individual implementation intentions (IIs or "I-plans") does not. In Experiment 1, three-member groups first formed a collective or an individual goal and then performed a first round of a physical persistence task. Groups then either formed a respective implementation intention (cII or II) or a control plan and then performed a second round of the task. Although groups with cIIs and IIs performed better on a physical persistence task than respective control groups, only cII groups interacted more cooperatively during task performance. To confirm the causal role of these interaction processes, Experiment 2 used the same persistence task and manipulated whether groups could communicate: When communication was hindered, groups with cIIs but not groups with IIs performed worse. Communication thus qualifies as a process making cIIs effective. The present research offers a psychology of action account to small group performance.

KW - Collective implementation intentions

KW - Cooperation and interaction

KW - Motivation

KW - Physical persistence

KW - Small group performance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018170445&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85018170445&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00603

DO - 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00603

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85018170445

VL - 8

JO - Frontiers in Psychology

JF - Frontiers in Psychology

SN - 1664-1078

IS - APR

M1 - 603

ER -