This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kaplan, R. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Utility of Maintaining Work Relationships Openly: An Experimental Study

Department of Organizational Behavior, School of Management, Case Westem Reserve University.

An experimental study compared two types of group maintenance: maintenance-by-expression, which manages interaction by discussing it openly, and maintenance-by-suppression, which manages interaction without examining it explicitly. It was predicted that these two types would have differential effects on group outcomes, specifically, that expressive maintenance would result in superior task performance, a more rewarding experience, greater knowledge about the social process, as well as higher emotional costs. These hypotheses were tested in a laboratory experiment in which 4-person mixed-sex groups worked on a series of human relations problems over a 4-hour period. Of the four hypotheses, two received strong support but the one pertaining to performance was not confirmed. The implications of these findings were examined with particular attention to the lack of evidence in this study, and in the literature, that expressive maintenance (process work) improves performance.

The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, Vol. 15, No. 1, 41-59 (1979)
DOI: 10.1177/002188637901500105


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. L. McLeod, J. K. Liker, and S. A. Lobel Process Feedback in Task Groups: An Application of Goal Setting Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 1, 1992; 28(1): 15 - 41. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. E. Mudrack Defining Group Cohesiveness: A Legacy of Confusion? Small Group Research, February 1, 1989; 20(1): 37 - 49. [Abstract]

				R. L. Hughes, W. E. Rosenbach, and W. H. Clover Team Development in an Intact, Ongoing Work Group: A Quasi-Field Experiment Group Organization Management, June 1, 1983; 8(2): 161 - 186. [Abstract]

				R. E. Kaplan The Conspicuous Absence of Evidence That Process Consultation Enhances Task Performance Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, July 1, 1979; 15(3): 346 - 360. [PDF]