Social Sensitivity Leads to High Performing Groups

Here is a transcript from a recent 60 second science report from the Scientific American:

Groups with Good Social Skills Outperform the Merely Smart

Groups of two to five members who interacted with each other best outperformed groups whose individual members had higher intelligence scores.

Karen Hopkin reports:

If Alice is smart, and Bob’s even smarter, working together they would A) be twice as smart, B) be half as smart or C) form a task force and get nothing done. According to new research, the answer is none of the above. It would actually depend on how well they get along.

What makes a group good at what it does? A team of scientists put their collective heads together and divided volunteers into groups of two to five. And they asked these groups to perform a variety of tasks, from brainstorming answers to questions like “What can you do with a brick?” to team typing blocks of complicated text.

What the researchers found is that the intelligence of individual group members was not a good predictor of how well the group as a whole performed. The teams that did best rated high in social sensitivity: their members interacted well, took turns speaking and included more females than groups that did poorly. The study is in the journal Science. [Anita Woolley et al., citation to come.]

So if you’re looking for a recipe for group smart, don’t automatically reach for the biggest brains. Try adding some heart. And at least one person who knows what to do with a brick.

Thank you Frédéric Domo for sharing this via Linked In.


One response to “Social Sensitivity Leads to High Performing Groups

  1. davidkoehn

    I remember executing a similar exercise at Johns Hopkins within the MBA program. The ideal as predicted by the hypothesis of the experiment was actually a mix of personality types and leadership styles.

    The exercise was to prioritize a list of items needed by the group to survive in a desert after a plane crash. The assumption is that there is “right” answer to this prioritization.

    If everyone just “got along” the result was watered down and had a low hit rate in terms of success.

    If everyone wanted to do it their way the result had a had a low hit rate in terms of success.

    When everyone in the group was an “expert” the results were as low as when non was an expert.

    The greatest success came with mixed coping styles, mixed genders, and mixed subject matter expertise.

    Mix it up! Great post!

    David Koehn
    Director of Product Strategy
    Saba People Learning
    t: davidkoehn
    w: http://sabasociallearning/com

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s