Group dynamics can have a significant impact on the productivity of a team. Sometimes, being in a group can cause people to have less motivation because of the social dynamic and their perceptions of their shared contributions, which is known as social loafing.
Most entertainingly Professor Bibb Latané and colleagues had people cheering, shouting and clapping in groups as loud as they could (Latané et al., 1979).When people were in groups of six they only shouted at one-third of their full capacity.
Social loafing is the tendency for people to contribute less effort to a group activity than an individual activity. This was identified by French agricultural engineer Maximilien Ringelmann in 1913 with measurements such as how hard individuals pull in a tug of war alone and in a team.
Social loafing theorizes that people often contribute less when working in groups. There are several reasons for that such as lack of motivation, absence of individual performance assessments, and large group sizes among others. Promoting individual responsibility, regular feedback, and creating smaller groups can help in tackling social loafing.
Social loafing is nothing but a social psychology phenomenon that comprises reduced performance and low productivity. According to it, employees working in a group put in less effort than they would when they work individually.
Social loafing almost always causes different types of hurdles for an organization to thrive. When social loafing occurs, the less productive nature of the group’s members not only impacts the growth of an organization but also creates a negative working culture in the team.
If you are looking for ways to reduce social loafing, first, you would have to understand the theory behind it. It is important to know how a phenomenon occurs so that you can do something to reduce its effects. Anyhow, here are some studies and theories that discuss social loafing in detail.
Theories help you get a good grasp of social loafing. However, real-life examples allow you to gain a much better understanding since you can relate with them. These incidents happen all the time in pretty much everyone’s lives. Anyhow, without further ado, here are a few examples of social loafing:
There are many factors that lead to social loafing. When you understand such factors, it becomes easier to tackle the issue at hand. Here are some of the prominent causes of this personality and social psychology problem:
Social loafing causes a serious negative impact on the performance of a team or a company. Hence, tackling it is highly necessary for a firm to flourish. Here are a few things to do to stop social loafing.
This means that social loafing is more likley to occur when working in a group of high-achievers, as an individul may slack off and allow the other competent group members to do most of the work.
Social loafing was first identified when French agricultural engineer Max Ringelmann was studying group performance, and found that groups (of people as well as animals) did not meet their potential, defining potential as the sum of the maximum output of each individual acting alone.
Latané (1981) defines social impact as: “any influence on individual feelings, thoughts, or behavior that is exerted by the real, implied, or imagined presence or actions of others”.
Social loafing can be limited by establishing individual accountability, minimizing free riding, encouraging team loyalty, and by assigning distinct responsibilities for each team member.
Factors influencing social loafing include expectations of co-worker performance, task meaningfulness and culture. The Collective Effort Model (CEM) of social loafing holds that whether or not social loafing occurs depends on members’ expectations for, and value of, the group’s goal.
Minimizing Free Riding. Minimizing free riding is another important step that groups can take to decrease social loafing. Free riding refers to situations in which group members exert less effort because others will compensate for them.
He believed that coordination loss — “the lack of simultaneity of their efforts” (p. 9) — was the main cause of social loafing, but also acknowledged that in some cases, workers lose motivation due to each man “trusting his neighbor to furnish the desired effort (p. 10).
This means that social loafing is more likley to occur when working in a group of high-achievers, as an individul may slack off and allow the other competent group members to do most of the work.
Social loafing was first identified when French agricultural engineer Max Ringelmann was studying group performance, and found that groups (of people as well as animals) did not meet their potential, defining potential as the sum of the maximum output of each individual acting alone.
Latané (1981) defines social impact as: “any influence on individual feelings, thoughts, or behavior that is exerted by the real, implied, or imagined presence or actions of others”.
Social loafing can be limited by establishing individual accountability, minimizing free riding, encouraging team loyalty, and by assigning distinct responsibilities for each team member.
Factors influencing social loafing include expectations of co-worker performance, task meaningfulness and culture. The Collective Effort Model (CEM) of social loafing holds that whether or not social loafing occurs depends on members’ expectations for, and value of, the group’s goal.
Minimizing Free Riding. Minimizing free riding is another important step that groups can take to decrease social loafing. Free riding refers to situations in which group members exert less effort because others will compensate for them.
He believed that coordination loss — “the lack of simultaneity of their efforts” (p. 9) — was the main cause of social loafing, but also acknowledged that in some cases, workers lose motivation due to each man “trusting his neighbor to furnish the desired effort (p. 10).