Social: Social Cognition and Teamwork - Foundations for Designing User-Centered Systems - page 236

8.3.7 Mutual Support and Mutual Surveillance

In addition to issues of social and spatial distance, the nature of the relationships
between team members influences team performance. In particular, peer-to-peer
and subordinate-superior relationships, which we discuss here, are important
(Harrison et al. 1998 ; Terborg et al. 1976 ; Turban and Jones 1988 ). If these
relationships change, this can lead to significant and divergent outcomes in team
performance (e.g., Grossman 1996 ).
Team membership offers several benefits. These include a sense of identity and
belonging (group norms), guidelines for dealing with ambiguous situations,
structuring of chaotic situations, and helping predict the actions of others (e.g.,
Chekroun and Brauer 2002 ; Cialdini et al. 1990 ; Smith and Mackie 1995 ). Fur-
thermore, social support can help to moderate the effects of stress by buffering
members from negative events (e.g., Caplan 1974 ; Cobb 1976 ; Epley 1974 ). The
relationship between social support and stress reduction is complex: Sandler and
Lakey ( 1982 ) found that the benefits of group support varied across individuals in
relation to the coping mechanisms used to deal with adverse situations.
On a peer-to-peer level, teams can help regulate behavior. Viewed through the
lens of appraisal theory (e.g., Cannon 1932 ; Festinger 1954 ; Lazarus and Folkman
1984 ), for example, group support facilitates participation. Appraisal theory pro-
poses that you judge a task looking at what resources the task requires and what
resources you have. If the task requires more than you have, it is a threatening task.
If not, it is a challenging task. If you are part of a team, you have more resources,
so being in a team will make the task more likely to be seen as challenging rather
than threatening.
Where behavior is deviant, however, Chekroun and Brauer ( 2002 ) found that if
the deviation could be clearly attributed to particular individuals, other team
members offered larger and more rapid responses of disapproval of those acts.
Contrary to expectations, larger deviations are typically met first with attempts to
mediate actor behavior rather than expulsion (Festinger 1954 ; Liska 1997 ), as
members try to eliminate the discrepancy. As the discrepancy narrows, the pressure
for uniformity appears to increase and becomes even greater when either the rele-
vance or the value of group membership increases (Festinger 1954 ). Simultaneously,
however, the impulse to individuate oneself and, for many people, to increase one's
relative status ensures a constant state of comparative surveillance, particularly for
groups operating in risky situations for prolonged periods (Dinter 1985 ).

8.3.8 Authority Figures

Team leaders are often expected to exert authority as part of their role. Leadership,
authority, and compliance have been extensively studied, most famously by
Stanley Milgram ( 1963 ). In Milgram's study, participants gave increasingly