John J. Sherwood

Effects of Team Development Intervention: A Field Experiment

A team development intervention was conducted with 22 three- and four-person work groups from an engineering survey course. For comparison purposes, 22 work groups from the surveying course served as controls and an additional 23 groups were observed to measure any possible Hawthorne effect. Random assignment of subjects to groups and groups to conditions resulted in a post-test-only control group experimental design. The major findings were: 1. Work groups experiencing team development did not perform better than controls. 2. Individuals in groups receiving team development perceived their group as being more effective and reported greater participation than members of control groups. 3. There was a nonsignificant tendency for individuals in groups receiving team development to express greater agreement on group goals. 4. There were no statistically significant differences between individuals in treatment and control groups in terms of: (a) perceived learning, (b) expressed satisfaction with group performance, or (c) expressed satisfaction with the group.

Change in Self-identity in a Management Training Conference

In this experiment, the amount of feedback (communicated objective public identity-COPI) was systematically varied and was related to responses on questionnaires asking about self-perception. Three hypotheses were tested: (i) the major hypothesis-the greater the amount of COPI, the greater the change in self-identity; (2) the greater the centrality (importance) of a dimension of self-perception to the subject, the greater the change in his self-identity on that dimension; (3) the lower a persons selfevaluation (or the higher his dissatisfaction) on a dimension of self-perception, the greater the change in his self-identity along that dimension. The setting for the experiment was a two-week conference in human relations training for 20 middle-management personnel. Questionnaire measurements of self-identity were made at the beginning, half way through, and at the end of the conference. In addition, a follow-up questionnaire was mailed to all participants ten months after the end of the conference to measure the permanence of change in self-identity. Major support for the hypotheses was expected during the second week of the conference (by which time the experimental manipulations had been introduced), with less change for the postconference period and little, if any, change during the first week. Some support for the first and third hypotheses was found, while there was no support for the second hypothesis.