Social Loafing A Field Investigation

Topics: Sociology, Distributive justice, Justice Pages: 20 (8574 words) Published: December 15, 2014
Journal of Management 2004 30(2) 285–304

Social Loafing: A Field Investigation
Robert C. Liden∗
Department of Managerial Studies, MC 243, University of Illinois at Chicago, 601 S. Morgan, Chicago, IL 60607-7123, USA

Sandy J. Wayne
Department of Managerial Studies, MC 243, University of Illinois at Chicago, 601 S. Morgan, Chicago, IL 60607-7123, USA

Renata A. Jaworski
Department of Managerial Studies, MC 243, University of Illinois at Chicago, 601 S. Morgan, Chicago, IL 60607-7123, USA

Nathan Bennett
DuPree College of Management, Georgia Institute of Technology, 755 Ferst Drive, Atlanta, GA 30332-0520, USA
Received 1 May 2002; received in revised form 1 November 2002; accepted 3 February 2003

Social loafing was investigated by testing a multilevel model among 23 intact work groups comprised of 168 employees representing two organizations. Results demonstrated that as hypothesized at the individual level, increases in task interdependence and decreases in task visibility and distributive justice were associated with greater occurrence of social loafing. At the group level, increased group size and decreased cohesiveness were related to increased levels of social loafing. Of particular interest was the finding that group member perceptions of perceived coworker loafing was associated with reduced social loafing, opposite of our predictions. We suggested that this unexpected finding may provide evidence of a social compensation effect. © 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Extensive research has focused on the productivity levels of individuals in workplace settings. Coinciding with the increased prevalence of individuals working in groups (Cohen & Bailey, 1997), more research attention has been devoted to group productivity and group productivity loss (Ilgen, 1999). A widely accepted explanation for productivity losses has been the social loafing phenomenon (George, 1992). Social loafing is based on the de-individuation that can occur when people work in groups as opposed to working alone. ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-312-996-2680.

E-mail addresses: bobliden@uic.edu (R.C. Liden), sjwayne@uic.edu (S.J. Wayne), rjawor@uic.edu (R.A. Jaworski), nate.bennett@mgt.gatech.edu (N. Bennett).

0149-2063/$ – see front matter © 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jm.2003.02.002

286

R.C. Liden et al. / Journal of Management 2004 30(2) 285–304

Consciously or unconsciously, due to the decrease in social awareness that can occur in group settings, individuals may not exert as much effort in group settings as when they are alone (Ringelmann, 1913; Williams, Harkins & Latané, 1981). The implications of this finding for organizations that rely on groups to function and perform at levels superior to those of individual employees are considerable, making the identification of the antecedents of social loafing especially salient.

In an attempt to uncover an explanation for the social loafing phenomenon, pioneering research by Ingham, Levinger, Graves and Peckham (1974) ruled out difficulty in coordination. More recently, researchers have grounded their study of social loafing in motivation theories, and have identified a wide variety of potential antecedents, including: lack of identification of individual contributions to the group (Williams et al., 1981); lack of challenge and uniqueness of individual contribution (Harkins & Petty, 1982); low intrinsic involvement (Brickner, Harkins & Ostrom, 1986; George, 1992); individualistic orientation (Wagner, 1995); low group cohesiveness (Karau & Williams, 1997); and lack of peer appraisals (Druskat & Wolff, 1999). Despite differences in the specific antecedents of social loafing, there is agreement that the fundamental origins of social loafing are motivational (George, 1992; Sheppard, 1993; Wagner, 1995).

The purposes of the current research were threefold: The first purpose was to examine several key antecedents of social loafing...

References: Arvey, R. D., & Murphy, K. R. 1998. Performance evaluation in work settings. Annual Review of Psychology, 49:
141–168.
Bollen, K. A., & Hoyle, R. H. 1990. Perceived cohesion: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces,
69: 479–504.
Brickner, M. A., Harkins, S. G., & Ostrom, T. M. 1986. Effects of personal involvement: Thought-proving
implications for social loafing
Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. 1993. Relations between work group characteristics and
effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups
Campion, M. A., Papper, E. M., & Medsker, G. J. 1996. Relations between work group characteristics and
effectiveness: A replication and extension
Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. 1997. What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to
the executive suite
Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O., & Ng, K. Y. 2001. Justice at the millennium: A
meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research
Comer, D. R. 1995. A model of social loafing in real work groups. Human Relations, 48: 647–667.
Druskat, V. U., & Wolff, S. B. 1999. Effects and timing of developmental peer appraisals in self-managing work
groups
Folger, R. 1977. Distributive and procedural justice: Combined impact of ‘voice’ and improvement on experienced
inequity
Garcia, S. M., Weaver, K., Moskowitz, G. B., & Darley, J. M. 2002. Crowded minds: The implicit bystander effect.
George, J. M. 1992. Extrinsic and intrinsic origins of perceived social loafing in organizations. Academy of
Management Journal, 35: 191–202.
George, J. M. 1995. Asymmetrical effects of rewards and punishments: The case of social loafing. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68: 327–338.
Greenberg, J. 1987. A taxonomy of organizational justice theories. Academy of Management Review, 12: 9–22.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 16: 250–279.
Harkins, S. G., Latané, B., & Williams, K. 1980. Social loafing: Allocating effort or taking it easy. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 16: 457–465.
Harkins, S. G., & Petty, R. E. 1982. The effect of task difficulty and task uniqueness on social loafing. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 43: 1214–1229.
Hechter, M. 1987. Principles of group solidarity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hofmann, D. A. 1997. An overview of the logic and rationale of hierarchical linear models. Journal of Management,
23: 723–742.
Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. 1998. Centering decisions in hierarchical linear models: Implications for research
in organizations
Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Sego, D. J., Hedlund, J., Major, D. A., & Phillips, J. 1995. Multilevel theory of
team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed expertise
Ilgen, D. R. 1999. Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications. American Psychologist, 54: 129–139.
Ingham, A. G., Levinger, G., Graves, J., & Peckman, V. 1974. The Ringelmann effect: Studies of group size and
group performance
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. 1984. Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without
response bias
Jones, G. R. 1984. Task visibility, free riding, and shirking: Explaining the effect of structure and technology on
employee behavior
Karau, S. J., & Hart, J. W. 1998. Group cohesiveness and social loafing: Effects of a social interaction manipulation
on individual motivation within groups
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. 1993. Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 65: 681–706.
Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. 1997. The effects of group cohesiveness on social loafing and social compensation.
Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. E. 1981. Ringelmann revisited: Alternative explanations for the social loafing effect.
Kidwell, R. E., & Bennett, N. 1993. Employee propensity to withhold effort: A conceptual model to intersect three
avenues of research
Kidwell, R. E., Mossholder, K. W., & Bennett, N. 1997. Cohesiveness and organizational citizenship behavior: A
multilevel analysis using work groups and individuals
Knoke, D. 1988. Incentives in collective action organizations. American Sociological Review, 53: 311–329.
Knoke, D. 1990. Organizing for collective action: The political economies of associations. New York: de Gruyter.
Kozlowski, S. W., & Klein, K. J. 2000. A multilevel approach to theory and research in organizations: Contextual,
temporal, and emergent processes
Landy, F. J., & Farr, J. L. 1980. Performance rating. Psychological Bulletin, 87: 72–107.
Latané, B., Williams, K. D., & Harkins, S. 1979. Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences
of social loafing
Lazear, E. P. 1979. Why is there mandatory retirement? Journal of Political Economy, 87: 1261–1284.
Lazear, E. P., & Rosen, S. 1981. Rank order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. Journal of Political Economy,
89: 841–864.
Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrowe, R. T. 2000. An examination of the mediating role of psychological
empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes
Manz, C. C., & Angle, H. 1986. Can group self-management mean a loss of personal control: Triangulating a
paradox
McNemar, Q. 1969. Psychological statistics (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.
Miles, J. A., & Klein, J. J. 2002. Perception in consequences of free riding. Psychological Reports, 90: 215–225.
Mitchell, T. R., Rothman, M., & Liden, R. C. 1985. The effects of normative information on task performance.
Mudrack, P. E. 1989. Group cohesiveness and productivity: A closer look. Human Relations, 42: 771–785.
Mulvey, P. W., Bowes-Sperry, L., & Klein, H. J. 1998. The effects of perceived loafing and defensive impression
management on group effectiveness
Mulvey, P. W., & Klein, H. J. 1998. The impact of perceived loafing and collective efficacy in group goal processes
and group performance
Murphy, S. K., Wayne, S. J., Liden, R. C., & Erdogan, B. 2003. Understanding social loafing: The role of justice
perceptions and exchange relationships
O’Reilly, C. A., Caldwell, D. F., & Barnett, W. P. 1989. Work group demography, social integration, and turnover.
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • social loafing Essay
  • Social Loafing and Social Facilitation Essay
  • Social Loafing Essay
  • Social Loafing In Technology Groups Essay
  • Essay about Social Loafing in Organisations
  • Social Loafing and Group Development Essay
  • Social Loafing Essay
  • Social Loafing Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free