Skip to main content
Log in

Do friends perform better than acquaintances? the interaction of friendship, conflict, and task

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines the influence of friendships among group members, intragroup conflict, and task on group performance. Previous research has found that friendships among group members (operationalized as group affinity, comraderie, or cohesion) has both positive and negative effects on performance. The effect of friendship on performance is contingent on many factors. The focus of this article is on the different types of conflict experienced by groups and on the type of task that the group is performing. The results indicate different interaction patterns and degrees of conflict (emotional, task content, and administrative conflict) in friend (strong relationship) groups and acquaintance (weak relationship) groups. Overall, the findings suggest that friend groups perform significantly better than acquaintance groups on both decision-making and motor tasks. Process data from transcripts of group discussions also suggest several mediating factors that may account for these performance differences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albrecht, T.L., and V.A. Ropp. (1984). “Communicating about Innovation in Networks of Three U.S. Organizations.”Journal of Communication, Summer.

  • Allison, G. (1971).Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston: Little, Brown & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyle, M., and A. Furnham. (1983). “Sources of Satisfaction and Conflict in Long-term Relationships.”Journal of Marriage and the Family August, 481–490.

  • Argyle, M., and M. Henderson. (1985). “The Rules of Relationships.” In S. Duck and D. Perlman (eds.),Understanding Personal Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C. (1962).Interpersonal Competence and Organizational Effectiveness. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R.A., and D. Byrne. (1987).Social Psychology: Understanding Human Interaction. Newton, MA: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, L. (1954). “Group Standards, Cohesiveness, and Productivity.”Human Relations 7, 509–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berscheid, E. (1983). “Emotion.” In H. Kelley and Associates (eds.),Close Relationships. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brehmer, B. (1976). “Social Judgment Theory and the Analysis of Interpersonal Conflict.”Psychological Bulletin 83, 985–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, R.L., and D.J. Prediger. (1981). “Coefficient Kappa: Some Uses, Misuses and Alternatives.”Journal of Educational Psychology 41, 687–699.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (1971).The Attraction Paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosier, R., and C. Schwenk. (1990). “Agreement and Thinking Alike: Ingredients for Poor Decisions.”Academy of Management Executive 4, 81–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, L.R., and L. Duberman. (1982). “Friendship: Communication and Interactional Patterns in Same-Sex Dyads.”Sex Roles 8, 809–822.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1969). “Conflicts: Productive and Destructive.”Journal of Social Issues 25, 7–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C.R., and K.L. Dion. (1991). “Group Cohesion and Performance A Meta-Analysis.”Small Group Research 22, 175–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P.S., and D.P. Leyden. (1991). “Familiarity and Group Productivity.”Journal of Applied Psychology 76, 578–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guetzkow, H., and J. Gyr. (1954). “An Analysis of Conflict in Decision-Making Groups.”Human Relations 7, 367–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, R.A. (1986). “Group Decision Making and Group Effectiveness in Organizations” In P.S. Goodman (ed.),Designing Effective Work Groups. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzzo, R.A., and G.P. Shea. (1992). “Group Performance and Intergroup Relations in Organizations.” In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds.),Handbook of Industrial & Organizational Psychology, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, J. (1990). “Social Psychological Perspectives on Group Composition: What Are the Implications for Strategy Research?” Presented at the Annual Conference of the Academy of Management, San Francisco, CA.

  • Janis, I.L. (1982).Groupthink. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehn, K.A. (1992). “The Impact of Intragroup Conflict on Effectiveness: A Multimethod Examination of the Benefits and Detriments of Conflict.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University.

  • Kaplan, R.E. (1979). “The Conspicuous Absence of Evidence That Process Consultation Enhances Task Performance.”The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 15, 346–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, H.H., and J.W. Thibaut. (1979).Interpersonal Relations. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt, H. (1964).Managerial Psychology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, J.M., and R.L. Moreland. (1990). “Progress in Small Group Research.”Annual Review of Psychology 41, 585–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, J., and J. Miller. (1979). “Work and Friendship Ties in Organizations: A Comparative Analysis of Relational Networks.”Administrative Science Quarterly 24, 181–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, J.F. (1984).Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikula, G., and T. Schwinger. (1978). “Intermember Relations and Reward Allocation: Theoretical Considerations of Affects.” In H. Brandstatter, J.H. Davis, and H. Schuler (eds.),Dynamics of Group Decisions. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muringan, K.J., and D.E. Conlon. (1991). “The Dynamics of Intense Work Groups: A Study of British String Quartets.”Administrative Science Quarterly 36, 165–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven, B., and J. Rubin. (1976).Social Psychology: People in Groups. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roloff, M.E. (1987). “Communication and Reciprocity Within Intimate Relationships.” In M.E. Roloff and G.R. Miller (eds.),Interpersonal Processes. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roloff, M.E., C.A. Janiszewski, M.A. McGrath, C.S. Burns, and L.A. Manrai. (1988). “Acquiring Resources from Intimates: When Obligation Substitutes for Persuasion.”Human Communication Research 14, 364–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schrieshein, J.F. (1980). “The Social Context of Leader Subordinate Relations: An Investigation of the Effects of Group Cohesiveness.”Journal of Applied Psychology 65, 183–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seashore, S.E. (1954).Group Cohesiveness in the Industrial Work Group. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundstrom, E., K.P. De Meuse, and D. Futrell. (1990). “Work Teams: Applications and Effectiveness.”American Psychologist 45, 120–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K.W. (1979). “Organizational Conflict.” In S. Kerr (ed.),Organizational Behavior. Columbus, OH: Grid Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A.S., and C.A. O'Reilly. (1989). “Beyond Simple Demographic Effects: The Importance of Relational Demography in Superior-Subordinate Dyads.”Academy of Management Journal 32, 402–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weingart, L.R. (1992). “Impact of Group Goals, Task Component Complexity, Effort, and Planning on Group Performance.”Journal of Applied Psychology 77, 682–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weldon, E., K. Jehn, and P. Pradhan. (1991). “Processes That Mediate the Relationship Between a Group Goal and Improved Group Performance.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61, 555–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodman, R.W., and J.J. Sherwood. (1980). “The Role of Team Development in Organizational Effectiveness: A Critical Review.”Psychological Bulletin 88, 116–186.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shah, P.P., Jehn, K.A. Do friends perform better than acquaintances? the interaction of friendship, conflict, and task. Group Decis Negot 2, 149–165 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01884769

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01884769

Key words

Navigation