Group efficiency

The size of the group does not have a direct and unambiguous effect on the success of its activities. However, an increase or decrease in the number of members depending on the task of the group, its structure and relationships may affect the results of the work. The psychological consequences of increasing or decreasing the number of group members are different, they can be either positive or negative.

Positive: ^[2]

1. As the group grows, more people with a distinct personality appear in it. This creates favorable conditions for a wide and diverse discussion of various issues.
2. The larger the group, the easier it is to distribute responsibilities among its members according to their capabilities and capabilities in the interests of the cause.
3. A larger group can collect and process more information at the same time.
4. In a large group, a larger number of people can participate in the development and decision-making, weighing and evaluating its positive and negative sides.
5. As a group grows, its “resource of talents" usually increases. This increases the likelihood of making optimal decisions. For tasks that have many alternative solutions, this fact seems to be very significant.

Negative: ^[2]

1. With an increase in the number of group members, its cohesion may decrease, and the likelihood of formation and decay into small groups will increase. This makes it very difficult to achieve unity on the issues discussed in the group.
2. It is difficult to manage a large group, organize the interaction of its members, and establish normal business and personal relationships between them.
3. Group growth can lead to increased differences of opinion and exacerbation of relationships.
4. With an increase in the group, the status and authority of some of its members grows, others decrease, and the psychological distance between them increases. Opportunities for the development and use of one’s abilities, satisfaction of communication needs, self-expression, recognition among some members of the group increase, while others decrease, which creates unfavorable conditions for the development of the individual.
5. As the group grows, the average contribution of each participant to the results of joint activities usually decreases.

The success of the group's work is greatly influenced by the task facing it. It should be noted that the task determines the structure of interaction of group members in the process of their joint work, and the structure, in turn, affects its results.

The dependence of group success on leadership style is also directly related to the level of socio-psychological development of the group.

• For a group approaching the level of development of a collective with self-governing bodies, capable of self-organizing activities, collegial forms of leadership that require a democratic, and in some situations even a liberal style of leadership, will be more effective.
• In groups at a medium level of development, the best results are given by a flexible leadership style, which combines elements of directiveness, democracy and liberalism.
• In relatively underdeveloped groups, not ready for independent work, not capable of self-organizing activities and having complex, conflicting relationships, a more directive style of leadership with elements of democracy is preferable. A prescriptive style as a temporary measure can also be useful in medium-developed groups when they work in difficult situations: a new task, lack of time, unexpected and significant changes in the composition, requiring a difficult and urgent reallocation of responsibilities, etc.

In 1972, Ivan Steiner developed a model of the relationship between the individual abilities of team players and interactions between players.

The Steiner model is represented by the following equation:

Actual productivity = potential productivity - losses due to erroneous group processes ^[3]

Potential performance is determined by the maximum achievement of the team and depends on the abilities , knowledge and skills (mental and physical) of each player, as well as the characteristics of the task.

According to the Steiner model, individual ability is the most important aspect for the team, therefore, a team consisting of the best athletes will, as a rule, achieve success. However, the Steiner model assumes that actual performance does not always match potential performance. Compliance will be achieved only if the team effectively uses the “resources” at its disposal, then actual performance will reach potential performance. Actual team performance is generally inferior to potential due to erroneous group processes. In a team, a group process is a set of interactions that transform individual “resources” into collective activity.

Erroneous group processes lead to two types of losses: ^[3]

• motivational (team players do not give all their best)
• coordination (violation of the coordination of players' actions or an ineffective strategy is applied)

• Andreeva G. M. Social Psychology: Textbook for Higher Education Institutions - 5th ed., Rev. and add. - M .: Aspect Press, 2007.
• Baron R., Kerr N. Miller N. “Perspectives of Social Psychology”, 2001
• Myers D. Social Psychology. St. Petersburg: Peter, 1997
• Krichevsky R. L., Dubovskaya E. M. Social Psychology of a Small Group: Textbook for High Schools. - M.: Aspect Press, 2001.— 318 s
• Gould D., Weinberg R. Fundamentals of the psychology of sport and physical education. - Olympic literature, 2001.