DTU ProjectLab - User contributions [en-gb]

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-12T18:21:25Z

CarolinaValderrama:

= Abstract =

[[File:Abstract.png|220px|thumb|right|Graphical Abstract]]

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

[[File:Interdependecies.png|200px|thumb|right|Example of interdependencies among group members. Figure based on references <ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> ]]

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

[[File:Belbin.png|600px|thumb|right|The Nine Belbin Team Roles. Figure based on reference <ref name="BELBIN"/> ]]
By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.
[[File:SMART-SOCIAL LOAFING.png|200px|thumb|RIGHT|S.M.A.R.T acronym, figure based on reference <ref name="SMART" />]]
'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*
[[File:Star Model.png|500px|thumb|RIGHT|Star Model by Jay R. Galbraith. Figure based on reference <ref name="STAR " />]]
'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

[[Category:''People'']]

Social Loafing in Teams

2023-05-12T18:20:10Z

CarolinaValderrama:

''Developed by Lærke Viuff Petersen, Spring 2022''

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, causing people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and if the people are ready to cooperate with each other.<ref name="Gil">Gil, Francisco. n.d. ‘Social Loafing’</ref> Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group.

One of the roles of a project, program, or portfolio manager is to motivate the team and make sure they perform at their best and contribute to the work <ref name="iso">Project Management: ISO 21502 (2021 Edition)</ref>. However, this can be challenging due to non-contributing team members, a concept also known as social loafing. This effect which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand underperformance and loss of productivity.

Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes the loss of individual motivation while working in a group or team, as opposed to working alone. This loss of motivation leads to a reduction in performance and effort exerted by the individual in the team <ref name="team">Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17</ref>.

This article will introduce the concept of social loafing and the underlying theories that explain the phenomenon and the factors affecting it. Furthermore, the relation to project, program, and portfolio management will be described as well as practical ways of reducing the effect of social loafing. Lastly, limitations of the theory and the research will be explored.

= Big Idea =

=== Social Loafing and Motivation ===
Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes “the reduction in motivation and effort when individuals work collectively compared with when they work individually or coactively” <ref name="meta">Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.</ref> Social loafing is, thereby, a concept that affects individual motivation, group dynamics, and team performance.

According to the PMBOK guide, people perform better when motivated and are motivated by different factors. They describe motivation as being either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation comes from within the individual, i.e., the feeling of achievement or the feeling of making a difference, while extrinsic motivation is found from an external source, i.e., praise or bonuses. Knowing how to motivate project team members is an important task of the project manager as it can elicit more effective engagement, higher team performance, and thereby better project outcomes <ref name="PMBOK">Project Management: A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK guide), 7th edition (2021)</ref>.

Social loafing refers to a motivation loss and can be explained by several different theories, described later in the article. The opposite of social loafing is a gain of motivation, referred to as either the Köhler effect or social compensation. These effects describe the tendency to exert more effort into a project, when you expect the teammates to perform moderately better at a task than you, or when you expect them to perform worse than you on what you deem as an important task <ref name="faci">Karau, S. J. (2012) Social Loafing (and Facilitation). ''Encyclopedia of Human Behavior: Second Edition.'' Elsevier Inc. Pages 486-492. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375000-6.00335-9</ref>.

[[File:Rindelmann_effect.png|frame|right|300x300px| Visualization of the Ringelmann Effect <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

=== History ===
The first experiment of social loafing was done in the 1880s by a French agricultural engineer called Max Ringelmann. He conducted a series of experiments where groups of varying sizes were to pull a rope while he measured the total pulling force. He had expected that the total pulling force would increase with the same amount when increasing the number of group members, as the total pulling force would be the sum of the individuals’ performance. However, he found that when the group size increased the newly added pulling force was increasingly less. This has been named the Ringelmann effect.

This was explained by either a coordination loss by the participants in larger groups or by a motivation loss. In the 1970s these explanations were separated and evidence of motivation loss in groups was found, and thereby the term social loafing was substantiated. Since then, a lot of research and experiments on the topic have been conducted, to find the causes and ways of reducing the phenomenon <ref name ="faci"/>.

=== Theories of Social Loafing ===
The explanation for the concept of social loafing can be found in different social psychology theories. In 1993 Karau and Williams published an article called “Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Integration” where they analyzed 78 previous studies on social loafing and interpreted them into a model. The study presents different theories that could explain the concept of social loafing as well as the model they created. Five of these theories and the model they created will be summarized in the following section using both the article from Karau and Williams and a chapter in a book written by Karau. <ref name ="meta"/><ref name ="chapter"/>

==== Social Impact Theory ====
In the social impact theory, people are seen as either a source or a target of social influence, and the amount of social influence depends on the strength, immediacy, and the number of sources and targets present. The number of sources increases the social impact while the number of targets reduces it. By working alone as a target, all the social influence of outside sources is directed at you, however, in a group setting the source of social influence is divided on to the different team members or targets. Therefore, the amount of responsibility experienced by the individuals in a team is less than when working individually. Social loafing will, therefore, be more present in larger groups as opposed to smaller ones <ref name="chapter">Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X</ref>.

==== Arousal Reduction ====
The arousal reduction theory is an extension of the social impact theory. Again, people can either serve as sources or co-targets of social impact, with the distinguishment between coactive and collective tasks. In a coactive task, individuals work alone in the presence of others that act as a source of influence. In a collective task, individuals work together and serve as co-targets of social impact. The theory argues that when performing a simple task individuals perform better when working coactively, while the opposite is true for complex tasks <ref name ="chapter"/>.

==== Evaluation Potential ====
The evaluation potential theory proposes that social loafing is more likely to occur when it is not possible to identify the work of the individual. Working in a team can allow the individual to feel more anonymous and thereby not be made directly responsible for a bad outcome. On the other hand, it also comes with a loss of individual credit, which can lower the motivation of the person. Therefore, a reduction in social loafing can be made by making the individuals’ work in a team identifiable <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Dispensability of Effort ====
The dispensability of effort theory suggests that individuals may exert less effort when working in teams as they feel that their inputs to the group work are not essential in achieving a high-quality end result, meaning that their work is dispensable. However, this reduction in effort can happen even though the individual's work is identifiable, and it, therefore, contradicts the evaluation potential theory <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Matching of Effort ====
The matching of effort theory suggests that when working in a team, people tend to match their teammates' efforts. Thereby social loafing occurs when individuals think that others in the group are going to slack. This follows research done about job attitudes, where it was found that individuals’ attitudes and motivation towards a task were highly influenced by their co-workers <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Collective Effort Model ====
Based on the different theories of social loafing from the meta-analytical review, a model of individual motivation in groups was created by Karau and Williams called the Collective Effort Model (CEM). It is based on an individual-level expectancy-value model of effort created by Vroom with added elements from the social identity and self-evaluation theories. In the original model, the motivation is dependent on three factors; expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Theses terms are described as: "(a) expectancy, or the degree to which high levels of effort are expected to lead to high levels of performance, (b) instrumentality, or the degree to which high-quality performance is perceived as instrumental in obtaining an outcome, and (c) valence of the outcome, or the degree to which the outcome is viewed as desirable."<ref name ="meta"/>

The CEM is an expansion of this for motivation on collective tasks as Karau and Williams found that motivation in collective tasks was not as simple as individual tasks and that collective tasks included more contingencies or barriers. Because of these extra contingencies, individuals are more likely to engage in social loafing on collective tasks. Based on the studies done previously, they found other factors that affected motivation in groups that did not affect individual motivation. For example, the performance of other group members and the diffusion of group outcome on the different group members. Also cultural, personality, situational, and individual differences affected the motivation as well as group variation. <ref name ="chapter"/>

[[File:Social_loafing_factors.png|frame|right|300x300px| Factors affecting social loafing <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

== Factors Affecting Social Loafing ==
Several different factors affecting social loafing have been determined through experimental studies. These factors and the implications will be described in the following section.

'''Task Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the task value increases. This follows the intrinsic motivation model, as the motivation will increase if the team member feels that the project is important or that they are making a difference. As an example, a research and development team is less likely to loaf, than a team working on a routine job, as the intrinsic value is greater for the research and development team <ref name="team" />.

'''Redundancy'''

An increase in social loafing is found the more redundant the contribution of a team member is. This means that the more unique the task is, the tendency to loaf is decreased. Therefore, social loafing is more prevalent in monodisciplinary teams as opposed to multidisciplinary teams. In monodisciplinary teams, everyone is capable of the same and their role can thereby feel redundant, whereas the roles in a multidisciplinary team are unique <ref name="team" />.

'''Evaluation'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the individuals in the team are evaluated, given feedback or when their work is identifiable. This follows the evaluation potential theory. If the individual’s work is not identifiable, there is a loss of responsibility and thereby it is easier to loaf <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the group value increases. Group value could include more familiar team members, high group cohesion, or strong group identity. When the group feels valuable to the individual, it is seen as more desirable to stay in the group and the individual will therefore be less likely to loaf. <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Size'''

An increase in social loafing is found when increasing the group size. This is found as the responsibility is divided onto several people in larger groups, following the social impact theory, and it is, therefore, easier for the individual to hide in the crowd. A reduction of social loafing is therefore found in smaller groups <ref name="team" />.

'''Culture'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for western cultures compared to eastern cultures. This is explained by eastern cultures being more collectively oriented than western cultures. A study was conducted that found that Israeli and Chinese participants worked harder on group tasks, whereas the American participants worked harder on individual tasks <ref name="team" />.

'''Gender'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for men compared to women. This is again explained by women being more collectively oriented than men <ref name="team" />.

'''Expectations of Others'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when they expect other team members to perform badly. In a study, they found that when team members announced that they were going to work hard other team members were more likely to loaf, and opposite when they announced, they were not going to work hard, the other team members loafed less <ref name="team" />.

'''Personality'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less in people who score high in need for achievement or work ethic. It is also found that individuals who feel superior to others are more likely to loaf compared to individuals with average self-beliefs. This is thought to be because the individual who feels superior believes that a lower effort will be enough for them to produce an adequate performance <ref name ="chapter"/>.

'''Communication'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less with higher communication quality. In a study, it was found that more than 53% of the variance in social loafing could be explained by communication quality and task cohesion. They found that this could be because open and honest communication allows the individuals to easier express their contribution to the project, and thereby increase the evaluation potential. Furthermore, it allowed the individuals to feel heard and valued by the other team members <ref name="com">Lam, C. (2015) The Role of Communication and Cohesion in Reducing Social Loafing in Group Projects. ''Business and Professional Communication Quarterly.'' Vol. 78(4), pages 454-475. DOI: 10.1177/2329490615596417</ref>.

= Application =

=== Social Loafing in Project, Program, and Portfolio Management ===
Most tasks in organizations are done collectively, so teams are ubiquitous in both project, program, and portfolio management. A study conducted by Kirkman et al. in 1996 asked 486 employees that worked in teams what their three biggest worries about working in a team were. Here, evidence was found that one of the biggest worries was social loafing, as 25 percent of the comments made were about social loafing. For example, the employees worried about having to work extra to compensate for slower team members. Therefore, the challenge of social loafing is important and deserves attention, in order to improve the performance of team members. To do this, the manager needs to understand the causes of social loafing, when to consider it, and ways of reducing it. <ref name="team" />

When comparing what has been described in this article to the ISO standard 21502, the challenge of social loafing can be found in resource management, specifically human resources. Therefore, an impact on social loafing could be made when establishing, developing, and managing the team. When establishing the team, team members are chosen, and the roles and responsibilities are divided. Here, the project manager should consider skills, expertise, culture, cost, and group dynamics. As mentioned before, some of these are factors in the level of social loafing and could thereby impact the effect of social loafing. However, the project manager is not always in control of choosing the team members. Therefore, in the development of the team phase, the aim is to help the team members work in a cohesive and collaborative manner. In the development of the team, it can be necessary to try and improve the performance and interactions of the team members, to enhance teamwork and motivation. The aim of managing the team is to keep them motivated and make them feel involved and make sure they perform at their best. The project manager’s job is to optimize the team members’ performance by i.e. providing feedback and encouraging collaborative work <ref name="iso" />. This follows the evaluation potential theory that describes a motivational loss with the lack of feedback, and thereby more social loafing.

== Reducing Social Loafing ==
Based on the underlying theories and studies of social loafing described in this article, practical initiatives for the project manager can be identified. These initiatives can be used when establishing, developing, and managing the team to reduce the effect of social loafing.

* Create smaller teams
* Create multidisciplinary teams
* Include people with high work ethics
* Include women and people from eastern cultures
* Make sure the team members are familiar and have a strong group identity
* Make sure the project is important to the team
* Create unique tasks and roles within the team that are essential
* Make the individual team members’ work identifiable
* Give individual credit and feedback
* Have open and honest communication

= Limitations =

Social loafing is a phenomenon that has been observed in more than 130 experimental studies. It has been tested on different types of tasks and by different populations and is thought to be a very robust social phycological concept <ref name ="chapter"/>.

However, the way that the experiments have been conducted has been criticized. Most of the studies done on social loafing rely on laboratory groups as opposed to real-life groups. Laboratory groups are randomly picked groups in controlled settings, with a limited existence, thereby they do not have a past or a future. They are also not embedded in organizations as groups normally would be in the real world and are only set to perform one simple task. Most of the studies are done with students, so less is known about social loafing in organizational teams with more complex tasks. It is therefore not possible to predict how people would act on multiple tasks; if a person will loaf on one project and then compensate in another, or if people are less inclined to loaf if they know they have to work with the same people on a future project. A study was conducted about social loafing with real life groups, where the members had known each other for at least 6 months. 16 conditions were tested where the groups either were with or without goals, communication, rewards, or collectivist values. Here, they only found evidence of social loafing 1 in the 16 conditions. Therefore, more experiments with real-life groups are needed to get a fully comprehensive view of social loafing <ref name ="team"/>.

Another way studies have been done is either by the participants self-reporting whether they social loaf or by the perception of whether team members social loaf. A study showed that 3.7% admitted to personally engage in social loafing while 35.7% believe that the others in their group were socially loafing. This difference in numbers indicates that people are less likely to admit to social loafing and the results of self-reporting studies can, therefore, be underestimated. <ref name="naval">Piezon, S. L. and Ferree, W. D. (2008) Perceptions of Social Loafing in Online Learning Groups: A study of Public University and U.S. Naval War College students . ''International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.'' Volume 9, Number 2</ref> Therefore, the best way to conduct studies with social loafing would be to use real-life teams with objective reporting.

Most of the core research about social loafing was done in the 1970s and 1980s but articles are still being published about the topic. Then the studies were more about the causes and factors, while today the research is more focused on social loafing in different industries and with different technology. For example, social loafing in human-robot interactions and social loafing in virtual teams have been studied recently.<ref name="virtual">Rober, L. P. (2020) Behavior‒output control theory, trust and social loafing in virtual teams. ''Multimodal Technologies and Interaction.'' Volume 4, Issue 3, page 1-22. DOI: 10.3390/mti4030039</ref> <ref name="robot"> Onnasch, L.; Panayotidis, T. (2020) Social Loafing with Robots – An Empirical Investigation ''Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting'' Volume 64, Issue 1, page 97-101</ref> However, the understanding of social loafing and technology is still limited, so more research needs to be done.<ref name ="virtual"/> The knowledge about social loafing keeps evolving and new factors and ways of reducing social loafing keep getting proved or disproved.

= Annotated Bibliography =
* Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.

This article is a meta-analytical review of 78 studies done about social loafing. In the article, they summarize the classical theories of social loafing and go through the characteristics and results of the previous literature. They use the analytical review to create the Collective Effort Model that is described in this article.

* Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X

This is a chapter in a book about individual motivation within groups. It gives an in-depth overview of social loafing, the classical theories, the factors that affect it, and motivation gains in groups. It is written by one of the same authors as the meta-analytical review, so it covers some of the same topics, but is newer and, therefore, includes more recent studies.

* Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17

This is a chapter in the International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working. The chapter covers social loafing in relation to teams and organizations. It also covers some of the theories of social loafing and describes possible remedies against social loafing in teams.

= References =
<references />

[[Category:''People'']]

Social Loafing in Teams

2023-05-12T17:10:26Z

CarolinaValderrama:

''Developed by Lærke Viuff Petersen, Spring 2022''

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, causing people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and if the people are ready to cooperate with each other.<ref name="Gil">Gil, Francisco. n.d. ‘Social Loafing’</ref> Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group.

One of the roles of a project, program, or portfolio manager is to motivate the team and make sure they perform at their best and contribute to the work <ref name="iso">Project Management: ISO 21502 (2021 Edition)</ref>. However, this can be challenging due to non-contributing team members, a concept also known as social loafing. This effect which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand underperformance and loss of productivity.

Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes the loss of individual motivation while working in a group or team, as opposed to working alone. This loss of motivation leads to a reduction in performance and effort exerted by the individual in the team <ref name="team">Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17</ref>.

This article will introduce the concept of social loafing and the underlying theories that explain the phenomenon and the factors affecting it. Furthermore, the relation to project, program, and portfolio management will be described as well as practical ways of reducing the effect of social loafing. Lastly, limitations of the theory and the research will be explored.

= Big Idea =

=== Social Loafing and Motivation ===
Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes “the reduction in motivation and effort when individuals work collectively compared with when they work individually or coactively” <ref name="meta">Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.</ref> Social loafing is, thereby, a concept that affects individual motivation, group dynamics, and team performance.

According to the PMBOK guide, people perform better when motivated and are motivated by different factors. They describe motivation as being either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation comes from within the individual, i.e., the feeling of achievement or the feeling of making a difference, while extrinsic motivation is found from an external source, i.e., praise or bonuses. Knowing how to motivate project team members is an important task of the project manager as it can elicit more effective engagement, higher team performance, and thereby better project outcomes <ref name="PMBOK">Project Management: A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK guide), 7th edition (2021)</ref>.

Social loafing refers to a motivation loss and can be explained by several different theories, described later in the article. The opposite of social loafing is a gain of motivation, referred to as either the Köhler effect or social compensation. These effects describe the tendency to exert more effort into a project, when you expect the teammates to perform moderately better at a task than you, or when you expect them to perform worse than you on what you deem as an important task <ref name="faci">Karau, S. J. (2012) Social Loafing (and Facilitation). ''Encyclopedia of Human Behavior: Second Edition.'' Elsevier Inc. Pages 486-492. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375000-6.00335-9</ref>.

[[File:Rindelmann_effect.png|frame|right|300x300px| Visualization of the Ringelmann Effect <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

=== History ===
The first experiment of social loafing was done in the 1880s by a French agricultural engineer called Max Ringelmann. He conducted a series of experiments where groups of varying sizes were to pull a rope while he measured the total pulling force. He had expected that the total pulling force would increase with the same amount when increasing the number of group members, as the total pulling force would be the sum of the individuals’ performance. However, he found that when the group size increased the newly added pulling force was increasingly less. This has been named the Ringelmann effect.

This was explained by either a coordination loss by the participants in larger groups or by a motivation loss. In the 1970s these explanations were separated and evidence of motivation loss in groups was found, and thereby the term social loafing was substantiated. Since then, a lot of research and experiments on the topic have been conducted, to find the causes and ways of reducing the phenomenon <ref name ="faci"/>.

=== Theories of Social Loafing ===
The explanation for the concept of social loafing can be found in different social psychology theories. In 1993 Karau and Williams published an article called “Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Integration” where they analyzed 78 previous studies on social loafing and interpreted them into a model. The study presents different theories that could explain the concept of social loafing as well as the model they created. Five of these theories and the model they created will be summarized in the following section using both the article from Karau and Williams and a chapter in a book written by Karau. <ref name ="meta"/><ref name ="chapter"/>

==== Social Impact Theory ====
In the social impact theory, people are seen as either a source or a target of social influence, and the amount of social influence depends on the strength, immediacy, and the number of sources and targets present. The number of sources increases the social impact while the number of targets reduces it. By working alone as a target, all the social influence of outside sources is directed at you, however, in a group setting the source of social influence is divided on to the different team members or targets. Therefore, the amount of responsibility experienced by the individuals in a team is less than when working individually. Social loafing will, therefore, be more present in larger groups as opposed to smaller ones <ref name="chapter">Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X</ref>.

==== Arousal Reduction ====
The arousal reduction theory is an extension of the social impact theory. Again, people can either serve as sources or co-targets of social impact, with the distinguishment between coactive and collective tasks. In a coactive task, individuals work alone in the presence of others that act as a source of influence. In a collective task, individuals work together and serve as co-targets of social impact. The theory argues that when performing a simple task individuals perform better when working coactively, while the opposite is true for complex tasks <ref name ="chapter"/>.

==== Evaluation Potential ====
The evaluation potential theory proposes that social loafing is more likely to occur when it is not possible to identify the work of the individual. Working in a team can allow the individual to feel more anonymous and thereby not be made directly responsible for a bad outcome. On the other hand, it also comes with a loss of individual credit, which can lower the motivation of the person. Therefore, a reduction in social loafing can be made by making the individuals’ work in a team identifiable <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Dispensability of Effort ====
The dispensability of effort theory suggests that individuals may exert less effort when working in teams as they feel that their inputs to the group work are not essential in achieving a high-quality end result, meaning that their work is dispensable. However, this reduction in effort can happen even though the individual's work is identifiable, and it, therefore, contradicts the evaluation potential theory <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Matching of Effort ====
The matching of effort theory suggests that when working in a team, people tend to match their teammates' efforts. Thereby social loafing occurs when individuals think that others in the group are going to slack. This follows research done about job attitudes, where it was found that individuals’ attitudes and motivation towards a task were highly influenced by their co-workers <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Collective Effort Model ====
Based on the different theories of social loafing from the meta-analytical review, a model of individual motivation in groups was created by Karau and Williams called the Collective Effort Model (CEM). It is based on an individual-level expectancy-value model of effort created by Vroom with added elements from the social identity and self-evaluation theories. In the original model, the motivation is dependent on three factors; expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Theses terms are described as: "(a) expectancy, or the degree to which high levels of effort are expected to lead to high levels of performance, (b) instrumentality, or the degree to which high-quality performance is perceived as instrumental in obtaining an outcome, and (c) valence of the outcome, or the degree to which the outcome is viewed as desirable."<ref name ="meta"/>

The CEM is an expansion of this for motivation on collective tasks as Karau and Williams found that motivation in collective tasks was not as simple as individual tasks and that collective tasks included more contingencies or barriers. Because of these extra contingencies, individuals are more likely to engage in social loafing on collective tasks. Based on the studies done previously, they found other factors that affected motivation in groups that did not affect individual motivation. For example, the performance of other group members and the diffusion of group outcome on the different group members. Also cultural, personality, situational, and individual differences affected the motivation as well as group variation. <ref name ="chapter"/>

[[File:Social_loafing_factors.png|frame|right|300x300px| Factors affecting social loafing <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

''Addition of Figure to complement and improve the model explanation''

==== Free Riding and Sucker Effect ====

Together with the Social Loafing Effect, there are two other effects that emerge with it, and can contribute to get a better overview of what Social Loafing means and what it can produce to the whole group, not only to an individual.

== Factors Affecting Social Loafing ==
Several different factors affecting social loafing have been determined through experimental studies. These factors and the implications will be described in the following section.

'''Task Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the task value increases. This follows the intrinsic motivation model, as the motivation will increase if the team member feels that the project is important or that they are making a difference. As an example, a research and development team is less likely to loaf, than a team working on a routine job, as the intrinsic value is greater for the research and development team <ref name="team" />.

'''Redundancy'''

An increase in social loafing is found the more redundant the contribution of a team member is. This means that the more unique the task is, the tendency to loaf is decreased. Therefore, social loafing is more prevalent in monodisciplinary teams as opposed to multidisciplinary teams. In monodisciplinary teams, everyone is capable of the same and their role can thereby feel redundant, whereas the roles in a multidisciplinary team are unique <ref name="team" />.

'''Evaluation'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the individuals in the team are evaluated, given feedback or when their work is identifiable. This follows the evaluation potential theory. If the individual’s work is not identifiable, there is a loss of responsibility and thereby it is easier to loaf <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the group value increases. Group value could include more familiar team members, high group cohesion, or strong group identity. When the group feels valuable to the individual, it is seen as more desirable to stay in the group and the individual will therefore be less likely to loaf. <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Size'''

An increase in social loafing is found when increasing the group size. This is found as the responsibility is divided onto several people in larger groups, following the social impact theory, and it is, therefore, easier for the individual to hide in the crowd. A reduction of social loafing is therefore found in smaller groups <ref name="team" />.

'''Culture'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for western cultures compared to eastern cultures. This is explained by eastern cultures being more collectively oriented than western cultures. A study was conducted that found that Israeli and Chinese participants worked harder on group tasks, whereas the American participants worked harder on individual tasks <ref name="team" />.

'''Gender'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for men compared to women. This is again explained by women being more collectively oriented than men <ref name="team" />.

'''Expectations of Others'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when they expect other team members to perform badly. In a study, they found that when team members announced that they were going to work hard other team members were more likely to loaf, and opposite when they announced, they were not going to work hard, the other team members loafed less <ref name="team" />.

'''Personality'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less in people who score high in need for achievement or work ethic. It is also found that individuals who feel superior to others are more likely to loaf compared to individuals with average self-beliefs. This is thought to be because the individual who feels superior believes that a lower effort will be enough for them to produce an adequate performance <ref name ="chapter"/>.

'''Communication'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less with higher communication quality. In a study, it was found that more than 53% of the variance in social loafing could be explained by communication quality and task cohesion. They found that this could be because open and honest communication allows the individuals to easier express their contribution to the project, and thereby increase the evaluation potential. Furthermore, it allowed the individuals to feel heard and valued by the other team members <ref name="com">Lam, C. (2015) The Role of Communication and Cohesion in Reducing Social Loafing in Group Projects. ''Business and Professional Communication Quarterly.'' Vol. 78(4), pages 454-475. DOI: 10.1177/2329490615596417</ref>.

'''Fatigue''' <ref name ="Fatigue">Baranski, Joseph v., Megan M. Thompson, Frederick M.J. Lichacz, Carol McCann, Valerie Gil, Luigi Pastò, and Ross A. Pigeau. 2016. ‘Effects of Sleep Loss on Team Decision Making: Motivational Loss or Motivational Gain?’ Https://Doi-Org.Proxy.Findit.Cvt.Dk/10.1518/001872007X215728 49 (4): 646–60. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X215728.</ref>

'''Knowledge''' <ref name ="Knowledge">Duong, Nam Tien, and Thuy Dung Pham Thi. 2022. ‘The Influence of Perceived Social Loafing on Knowledge Sharing Intentions among College Students’. Obrazovanie i Nauka 24 (5): 41–63. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2022-5-41-63.</ref>

''- Complement each factor or cause in order to have a better understanding of why the effect of Social Loafing is produced and to be aware that it can arise unintentionally.

''- Addition and explanation of two important factors (Fatigue and Knowledge) in teamwork that directly affect team performance and are worth considering in terms of causes.

''- Figure update of how the causes are related and how this can lead help to implement solutions from a managerial perspective''

= Application =

=== Social Loafing in Project, Program, and Portfolio Management ===
Most tasks in organizations are done collectively, so teams are ubiquitous in both project, program, and portfolio management. A study conducted by Kirkman et al. in 1996 asked 486 employees that worked in teams what their three biggest worries about working in a team were. Here, evidence was found that one of the biggest worries was social loafing, as 25 percent of the comments made were about social loafing. For example, the employees worried about having to work extra to compensate for slower team members. Therefore, the challenge of social loafing is important and deserves attention, in order to improve the performance of team members. To do this, the manager needs to understand the causes of social loafing, when to consider it, and ways of reducing it. <ref name="team" />

When comparing what has been described in this article to the ISO standard 21502, the challenge of social loafing can be found in resource management, specifically human resources. Therefore, an impact on social loafing could be made when establishing, developing, and managing the team. When establishing the team, team members are chosen, and the roles and responsibilities are divided. Here, the project manager should consider skills, expertise, culture, cost, and group dynamics. As mentioned before, some of these are factors in the level of social loafing and could thereby impact the effect of social loafing. However, the project manager is not always in control of choosing the team members. Therefore, in the development of the team phase, the aim is to help the team members work in a cohesive and collaborative manner. In the development of the team, it can be necessary to try and improve the performance and interactions of the team members, to enhance teamwork and motivation. The aim of managing the team is to keep them motivated and make them feel involved and make sure they perform at their best. The project manager’s job is to optimize the team members’ performance by i.e. providing feedback and encouraging collaborative work <ref name="iso" />. This follows the evaluation potential theory that describes a motivational loss with the lack of feedback, and thereby more social loafing.

=== Impact of Social Loafing in project development ===

<ref name="In Projects">Chen, Zhen. 2022. ‘The Impact of Megaproject Stakeholders’ Psychological Ownership on Cooperative Innovation Performance: Territorial Behavior and Social Loafing as Mediator’. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5536516.</ref>

== Reducing Social Loafing ==
Based on the underlying theories and studies of social loafing described in this article, practical initiatives for the project manager can be identified. These initiatives can be used when establishing, developing, and managing the team to reduce the effect of social loafing.

* Create smaller teams
* Create multidisciplinary teams
* Include people with high work ethics
* Include women and people from eastern cultures
* Make sure the team members are familiar and have a strong group identity
* Make sure the project is important to the team
* Create unique tasks and roles within the team that are essential
* Make the individual team members’ work identifiable
* Give individual credit and feedback
* Have open and honest communication

=== Solutions from a managerial perspective ===
<ref name ="Managerial">Vveinhardt, Jolita, and Justina Banikonytė. 2017. ‘Managerial Solutions That Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing’. Management of Organizations: Systematic Research 78 (1): 109–29. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019.</ref>

=== Importance of Leadership ===

<ref name ="Leadership">Baker, Elizabeth White and Thompson, Ronald. 2014. ‘Impacts of Organizational Behavior on IT Project Teams: Leadership’s Impact on Social Loafing’.</ref>

= Limitations =

Social loafing is a phenomenon that has been observed in more than 130 experimental studies. It has been tested on different types of tasks and by different populations and is thought to be a very robust social phycological concept <ref name ="chapter"/>.

However, the way that the experiments have been conducted has been criticized. Most of the studies done on social loafing rely on laboratory groups as opposed to real-life groups. Laboratory groups are randomly picked groups in controlled settings, with a limited existence, thereby they do not have a past or a future. They are also not embedded in organizations as groups normally would be in the real world and are only set to perform one simple task. Most of the studies are done with students, so less is known about social loafing in organizational teams with more complex tasks. It is therefore not possible to predict how people would act on multiple tasks; if a person will loaf on one project and then compensate in another, or if people are less inclined to loaf if they know they have to work with the same people on a future project. A study was conducted about social loafing with real life groups, where the members had known each other for at least 6 months. 16 conditions were tested where the groups either were with or without goals, communication, rewards, or collectivist values. Here, they only found evidence of social loafing 1 in the 16 conditions. Therefore, more experiments with real-life groups are needed to get a fully comprehensive view of social loafing <ref name ="team"/>.

Another way studies have been done is either by the participants self-reporting whether they social loaf or by the perception of whether team members social loaf. A study showed that 3.7% admitted to personally engage in social loafing while 35.7% believe that the others in their group were socially loafing. This difference in numbers indicates that people are less likely to admit to social loafing and the results of self-reporting studies can, therefore, be underestimated. <ref name="naval">Piezon, S. L. and Ferree, W. D. (2008) Perceptions of Social Loafing in Online Learning Groups: A study of Public University and U.S. Naval War College students . ''International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.'' Volume 9, Number 2</ref> Therefore, the best way to conduct studies with social loafing would be to use real-life teams with objective reporting.

Most of the core research about social loafing was done in the 1970s and 1980s but articles are still being published about the topic. Then the studies were more about the causes and factors, while today the research is more focused on social loafing in different industries and with different technology. For example, social loafing in human-robot interactions and social loafing in virtual teams have been studied recently.<ref name="virtual">Rober, L. P. (2020) Behavior‒output control theory, trust and social loafing in virtual teams. ''Multimodal Technologies and Interaction.'' Volume 4, Issue 3, page 1-22. DOI: 10.3390/mti4030039</ref> <ref name="robot"> Onnasch, L.; Panayotidis, T. (2020) Social Loafing with Robots – An Empirical Investigation ''Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting'' Volume 64, Issue 1, page 97-101</ref> However, the understanding of social loafing and technology is still limited, so more research needs to be done.<ref name ="virtual"/> The knowledge about social loafing keeps evolving and new factors and ways of reducing social loafing keep getting proved or disproved.

= Annotated Bibliography =
* Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.

This article is a meta-analytical review of 78 studies done about social loafing. In the article, they summarize the classical theories of social loafing and go through the characteristics and results of the previous literature. They use the analytical review to create the Collective Effort Model that is described in this article.

* Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X

This is a chapter in a book about individual motivation within groups. It gives an in-depth overview of social loafing, the classical theories, the factors that affect it, and motivation gains in groups. It is written by one of the same authors as the meta-analytical review, so it covers some of the same topics, but is newer and, therefore, includes more recent studies.

* Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17

This is a chapter in the International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working. The chapter covers social loafing in relation to teams and organizations. It also covers some of the theories of social loafing and describes possible remedies against social loafing in teams.

= References =
<references />

[[Category:''People'']]

Social Loafing in Teams

2023-05-12T16:57:56Z

CarolinaValderrama: Undo revision 129071 by CarolinaValderrama (talk)

''Developed by Lærke Viuff Petersen, Spring 2022'' and ''Carolina Valderrama, Spring 2023''

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, causing people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and if the people are ready to cooperate with each other.<ref name="Gil">Gil, Francisco. n.d. ‘Social Loafing’</ref> Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group.

One of the roles of a project, program, or portfolio manager is to motivate the team and make sure they perform at their best and contribute to the work <ref name="iso">Project Management: ISO 21502 (2021 Edition)</ref>. However, this can be challenging due to non-contributing team members, a concept also known as social loafing. This effect which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand underperformance and loss of productivity.

Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes the loss of individual motivation while working in a group or team, as opposed to working alone. This loss of motivation leads to a reduction in performance and effort exerted by the individual in the team <ref name="team">Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17</ref>.

This article will introduce the concept of social loafing and the underlying theories that explain the phenomenon and the factors affecting it. Furthermore, the relation to project, program, and portfolio management will be described as well as practical ways of reducing the effect of social loafing. Lastly, limitations of the theory and the research will be explored.

= Big Idea =

=== Social Loafing and Motivation ===
Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes “the reduction in motivation and effort when individuals work collectively compared with when they work individually or coactively” <ref name="meta">Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.</ref> Social loafing is, thereby, a concept that affects individual motivation, group dynamics, and team performance.

According to the PMBOK guide, people perform better when motivated and are motivated by different factors. They describe motivation as being either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation comes from within the individual, i.e., the feeling of achievement or the feeling of making a difference, while extrinsic motivation is found from an external source, i.e., praise or bonuses. Knowing how to motivate project team members is an important task of the project manager as it can elicit more effective engagement, higher team performance, and thereby better project outcomes <ref name="PMBOK">Project Management: A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK guide), 7th edition (2021)</ref>.

Social loafing refers to a motivation loss and can be explained by several different theories, described later in the article. The opposite of social loafing is a gain of motivation, referred to as either the Köhler effect or social compensation. These effects describe the tendency to exert more effort into a project, when you expect the teammates to perform moderately better at a task than you, or when you expect them to perform worse than you on what you deem as an important task <ref name="faci">Karau, S. J. (2012) Social Loafing (and Facilitation). ''Encyclopedia of Human Behavior: Second Edition.'' Elsevier Inc. Pages 486-492. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375000-6.00335-9</ref>.

[[File:Rindelmann_effect.png|frame|right|300x300px| Visualization of the Ringelmann Effect <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

=== History ===
The first experiment of social loafing was done in the 1880s by a French agricultural engineer called Max Ringelmann. He conducted a series of experiments where groups of varying sizes were to pull a rope while he measured the total pulling force. He had expected that the total pulling force would increase with the same amount when increasing the number of group members, as the total pulling force would be the sum of the individuals’ performance. However, he found that when the group size increased the newly added pulling force was increasingly less. This has been named the Ringelmann effect.

This was explained by either a coordination loss by the participants in larger groups or by a motivation loss. In the 1970s these explanations were separated and evidence of motivation loss in groups was found, and thereby the term social loafing was substantiated. Since then, a lot of research and experiments on the topic have been conducted, to find the causes and ways of reducing the phenomenon <ref name ="faci"/>.

=== Theories of Social Loafing ===
The explanation for the concept of social loafing can be found in different social psychology theories. In 1993 Karau and Williams published an article called “Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Integration” where they analyzed 78 previous studies on social loafing and interpreted them into a model. The study presents different theories that could explain the concept of social loafing as well as the model they created. Five of these theories and the model they created will be summarized in the following section using both the article from Karau and Williams and a chapter in a book written by Karau. <ref name ="meta"/><ref name ="chapter"/>

==== Social Impact Theory ====
In the social impact theory, people are seen as either a source or a target of social influence, and the amount of social influence depends on the strength, immediacy, and the number of sources and targets present. The number of sources increases the social impact while the number of targets reduces it. By working alone as a target, all the social influence of outside sources is directed at you, however, in a group setting the source of social influence is divided on to the different team members or targets. Therefore, the amount of responsibility experienced by the individuals in a team is less than when working individually. Social loafing will, therefore, be more present in larger groups as opposed to smaller ones <ref name="chapter">Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X</ref>.

==== Arousal Reduction ====
The arousal reduction theory is an extension of the social impact theory. Again, people can either serve as sources or co-targets of social impact, with the distinguishment between coactive and collective tasks. In a coactive task, individuals work alone in the presence of others that act as a source of influence. In a collective task, individuals work together and serve as co-targets of social impact. The theory argues that when performing a simple task individuals perform better when working coactively, while the opposite is true for complex tasks <ref name ="chapter"/>.

==== Evaluation Potential ====
The evaluation potential theory proposes that social loafing is more likely to occur when it is not possible to identify the work of the individual. Working in a team can allow the individual to feel more anonymous and thereby not be made directly responsible for a bad outcome. On the other hand, it also comes with a loss of individual credit, which can lower the motivation of the person. Therefore, a reduction in social loafing can be made by making the individuals’ work in a team identifiable <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Dispensability of Effort ====
The dispensability of effort theory suggests that individuals may exert less effort when working in teams as they feel that their inputs to the group work are not essential in achieving a high-quality end result, meaning that their work is dispensable. However, this reduction in effort can happen even though the individual's work is identifiable, and it, therefore, contradicts the evaluation potential theory <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Matching of Effort ====
The matching of effort theory suggests that when working in a team, people tend to match their teammates' efforts. Thereby social loafing occurs when individuals think that others in the group are going to slack. This follows research done about job attitudes, where it was found that individuals’ attitudes and motivation towards a task were highly influenced by their co-workers <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Collective Effort Model ====
Based on the different theories of social loafing from the meta-analytical review, a model of individual motivation in groups was created by Karau and Williams called the Collective Effort Model (CEM). It is based on an individual-level expectancy-value model of effort created by Vroom with added elements from the social identity and self-evaluation theories. In the original model, the motivation is dependent on three factors; expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Theses terms are described as: "(a) expectancy, or the degree to which high levels of effort are expected to lead to high levels of performance, (b) instrumentality, or the degree to which high-quality performance is perceived as instrumental in obtaining an outcome, and (c) valence of the outcome, or the degree to which the outcome is viewed as desirable."<ref name ="meta"/>

The CEM is an expansion of this for motivation on collective tasks as Karau and Williams found that motivation in collective tasks was not as simple as individual tasks and that collective tasks included more contingencies or barriers. Because of these extra contingencies, individuals are more likely to engage in social loafing on collective tasks. Based on the studies done previously, they found other factors that affected motivation in groups that did not affect individual motivation. For example, the performance of other group members and the diffusion of group outcome on the different group members. Also cultural, personality, situational, and individual differences affected the motivation as well as group variation. <ref name ="chapter"/>

[[File:Social_loafing_factors.png|frame|right|300x300px| Factors affecting social loafing <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

''Addition of Figure to complement and improve the model explanation''

==== Free Riding and Sucker Effect ====

Together with the Social Loafing Effect, there are two other effects that emerge with it, and can contribute to get a better overview of what Social Loafing means and what it can produce to the whole group, not only to an individual.

== Factors Affecting Social Loafing ==
Several different factors affecting social loafing have been determined through experimental studies. These factors and the implications will be described in the following section.

'''Task Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the task value increases. This follows the intrinsic motivation model, as the motivation will increase if the team member feels that the project is important or that they are making a difference. As an example, a research and development team is less likely to loaf, than a team working on a routine job, as the intrinsic value is greater for the research and development team <ref name="team" />.

'''Redundancy'''

An increase in social loafing is found the more redundant the contribution of a team member is. This means that the more unique the task is, the tendency to loaf is decreased. Therefore, social loafing is more prevalent in monodisciplinary teams as opposed to multidisciplinary teams. In monodisciplinary teams, everyone is capable of the same and their role can thereby feel redundant, whereas the roles in a multidisciplinary team are unique <ref name="team" />.

'''Evaluation'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the individuals in the team are evaluated, given feedback or when their work is identifiable. This follows the evaluation potential theory. If the individual’s work is not identifiable, there is a loss of responsibility and thereby it is easier to loaf <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the group value increases. Group value could include more familiar team members, high group cohesion, or strong group identity. When the group feels valuable to the individual, it is seen as more desirable to stay in the group and the individual will therefore be less likely to loaf. <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Size'''

An increase in social loafing is found when increasing the group size. This is found as the responsibility is divided onto several people in larger groups, following the social impact theory, and it is, therefore, easier for the individual to hide in the crowd. A reduction of social loafing is therefore found in smaller groups <ref name="team" />.

'''Culture'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for western cultures compared to eastern cultures. This is explained by eastern cultures being more collectively oriented than western cultures. A study was conducted that found that Israeli and Chinese participants worked harder on group tasks, whereas the American participants worked harder on individual tasks <ref name="team" />.

'''Gender'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for men compared to women. This is again explained by women being more collectively oriented than men <ref name="team" />.

'''Expectations of Others'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when they expect other team members to perform badly. In a study, they found that when team members announced that they were going to work hard other team members were more likely to loaf, and opposite when they announced, they were not going to work hard, the other team members loafed less <ref name="team" />.

'''Personality'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less in people who score high in need for achievement or work ethic. It is also found that individuals who feel superior to others are more likely to loaf compared to individuals with average self-beliefs. This is thought to be because the individual who feels superior believes that a lower effort will be enough for them to produce an adequate performance <ref name ="chapter"/>.

'''Communication'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less with higher communication quality. In a study, it was found that more than 53% of the variance in social loafing could be explained by communication quality and task cohesion. They found that this could be because open and honest communication allows the individuals to easier express their contribution to the project, and thereby increase the evaluation potential. Furthermore, it allowed the individuals to feel heard and valued by the other team members <ref name="com">Lam, C. (2015) The Role of Communication and Cohesion in Reducing Social Loafing in Group Projects. ''Business and Professional Communication Quarterly.'' Vol. 78(4), pages 454-475. DOI: 10.1177/2329490615596417</ref>.

'''Fatigue''' <ref name ="Fatigue">Baranski, Joseph v., Megan M. Thompson, Frederick M.J. Lichacz, Carol McCann, Valerie Gil, Luigi Pastò, and Ross A. Pigeau. 2016. ‘Effects of Sleep Loss on Team Decision Making: Motivational Loss or Motivational Gain?’ Https://Doi-Org.Proxy.Findit.Cvt.Dk/10.1518/001872007X215728 49 (4): 646–60. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X215728.</ref>

'''Knowledge''' <ref name ="Knowledge">Duong, Nam Tien, and Thuy Dung Pham Thi. 2022. ‘The Influence of Perceived Social Loafing on Knowledge Sharing Intentions among College Students’. Obrazovanie i Nauka 24 (5): 41–63. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2022-5-41-63.</ref>

''- Complement each factor or cause in order to have a better understanding of why the effect of Social Loafing is produced and to be aware that it can arise unintentionally.

''- Addition and explanation of two important factors (Fatigue and Knowledge) in teamwork that directly affect team performance and are worth considering in terms of causes.

''- Figure update of how the causes are related and how this can lead help to implement solutions from a managerial perspective''

= Application =

=== Social Loafing in Project, Program, and Portfolio Management ===
Most tasks in organizations are done collectively, so teams are ubiquitous in both project, program, and portfolio management. A study conducted by Kirkman et al. in 1996 asked 486 employees that worked in teams what their three biggest worries about working in a team were. Here, evidence was found that one of the biggest worries was social loafing, as 25 percent of the comments made were about social loafing. For example, the employees worried about having to work extra to compensate for slower team members. Therefore, the challenge of social loafing is important and deserves attention, in order to improve the performance of team members. To do this, the manager needs to understand the causes of social loafing, when to consider it, and ways of reducing it. <ref name="team" />

When comparing what has been described in this article to the ISO standard 21502, the challenge of social loafing can be found in resource management, specifically human resources. Therefore, an impact on social loafing could be made when establishing, developing, and managing the team. When establishing the team, team members are chosen, and the roles and responsibilities are divided. Here, the project manager should consider skills, expertise, culture, cost, and group dynamics. As mentioned before, some of these are factors in the level of social loafing and could thereby impact the effect of social loafing. However, the project manager is not always in control of choosing the team members. Therefore, in the development of the team phase, the aim is to help the team members work in a cohesive and collaborative manner. In the development of the team, it can be necessary to try and improve the performance and interactions of the team members, to enhance teamwork and motivation. The aim of managing the team is to keep them motivated and make them feel involved and make sure they perform at their best. The project manager’s job is to optimize the team members’ performance by i.e. providing feedback and encouraging collaborative work <ref name="iso" />. This follows the evaluation potential theory that describes a motivational loss with the lack of feedback, and thereby more social loafing.

=== Impact of Social Loafing in project development ===

<ref name="In Projects">Chen, Zhen. 2022. ‘The Impact of Megaproject Stakeholders’ Psychological Ownership on Cooperative Innovation Performance: Territorial Behavior and Social Loafing as Mediator’. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5536516.</ref>

== Reducing Social Loafing ==
Based on the underlying theories and studies of social loafing described in this article, practical initiatives for the project manager can be identified. These initiatives can be used when establishing, developing, and managing the team to reduce the effect of social loafing.

* Create smaller teams
* Create multidisciplinary teams
* Include people with high work ethics
* Include women and people from eastern cultures
* Make sure the team members are familiar and have a strong group identity
* Make sure the project is important to the team
* Create unique tasks and roles within the team that are essential
* Make the individual team members’ work identifiable
* Give individual credit and feedback
* Have open and honest communication

=== Solutions from a managerial perspective ===
<ref name ="Managerial">Vveinhardt, Jolita, and Justina Banikonytė. 2017. ‘Managerial Solutions That Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing’. Management of Organizations: Systematic Research 78 (1): 109–29. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019.</ref>

=== Importance of Leadership ===

<ref name ="Leadership">Baker, Elizabeth White and Thompson, Ronald. 2014. ‘Impacts of Organizational Behavior on IT Project Teams: Leadership’s Impact on Social Loafing’.</ref>

= Limitations =

Social loafing is a phenomenon that has been observed in more than 130 experimental studies. It has been tested on different types of tasks and by different populations and is thought to be a very robust social phycological concept <ref name ="chapter"/>.

However, the way that the experiments have been conducted has been criticized. Most of the studies done on social loafing rely on laboratory groups as opposed to real-life groups. Laboratory groups are randomly picked groups in controlled settings, with a limited existence, thereby they do not have a past or a future. They are also not embedded in organizations as groups normally would be in the real world and are only set to perform one simple task. Most of the studies are done with students, so less is known about social loafing in organizational teams with more complex tasks. It is therefore not possible to predict how people would act on multiple tasks; if a person will loaf on one project and then compensate in another, or if people are less inclined to loaf if they know they have to work with the same people on a future project. A study was conducted about social loafing with real life groups, where the members had known each other for at least 6 months. 16 conditions were tested where the groups either were with or without goals, communication, rewards, or collectivist values. Here, they only found evidence of social loafing 1 in the 16 conditions. Therefore, more experiments with real-life groups are needed to get a fully comprehensive view of social loafing <ref name ="team"/>.

Another way studies have been done is either by the participants self-reporting whether they social loaf or by the perception of whether team members social loaf. A study showed that 3.7% admitted to personally engage in social loafing while 35.7% believe that the others in their group were socially loafing. This difference in numbers indicates that people are less likely to admit to social loafing and the results of self-reporting studies can, therefore, be underestimated. <ref name="naval">Piezon, S. L. and Ferree, W. D. (2008) Perceptions of Social Loafing in Online Learning Groups: A study of Public University and U.S. Naval War College students . ''International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.'' Volume 9, Number 2</ref> Therefore, the best way to conduct studies with social loafing would be to use real-life teams with objective reporting.

Most of the core research about social loafing was done in the 1970s and 1980s but articles are still being published about the topic. Then the studies were more about the causes and factors, while today the research is more focused on social loafing in different industries and with different technology. For example, social loafing in human-robot interactions and social loafing in virtual teams have been studied recently.<ref name="virtual">Rober, L. P. (2020) Behavior‒output control theory, trust and social loafing in virtual teams. ''Multimodal Technologies and Interaction.'' Volume 4, Issue 3, page 1-22. DOI: 10.3390/mti4030039</ref> <ref name="robot"> Onnasch, L.; Panayotidis, T. (2020) Social Loafing with Robots – An Empirical Investigation ''Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting'' Volume 64, Issue 1, page 97-101</ref> However, the understanding of social loafing and technology is still limited, so more research needs to be done.<ref name ="virtual"/> The knowledge about social loafing keeps evolving and new factors and ways of reducing social loafing keep getting proved or disproved.

= Annotated Bibliography =
* Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.

This article is a meta-analytical review of 78 studies done about social loafing. In the article, they summarize the classical theories of social loafing and go through the characteristics and results of the previous literature. They use the analytical review to create the Collective Effort Model that is described in this article.

* Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X

This is a chapter in a book about individual motivation within groups. It gives an in-depth overview of social loafing, the classical theories, the factors that affect it, and motivation gains in groups. It is written by one of the same authors as the meta-analytical review, so it covers some of the same topics, but is newer and, therefore, includes more recent studies.

* Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17

This is a chapter in the International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working. The chapter covers social loafing in relation to teams and organizations. It also covers some of the theories of social loafing and describes possible remedies against social loafing in teams.

= References =
<references />

[[Category:''People'']]

Social Loafing in Teams

2023-05-12T16:56:17Z

CarolinaValderrama: Undo revision 130461 by CarolinaValderrama (talk)

''Developed by Lærke Viuff Petersen, Spring 2022'' and ''Carolina Valderrama, Spring 2023''

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, causing people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and if the people are ready to cooperate with each other.<ref name="Gil">Gil, Francisco. n.d. ‘Social Loafing’</ref> Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group.

One of the roles of a project, program, or portfolio manager is to motivate the team and make sure they perform at their best and contribute to the work <ref name="iso">Project Management: ISO 21502 (2021 Edition)</ref>. However, this can be challenging due to non-contributing team members, a concept also known as social loafing. This effect which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand underperformance and loss of productivity.

Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes the loss of individual motivation while working in a group or team, as opposed to working alone. This loss of motivation leads to a reduction in performance and effort exerted by the individual in the team <ref name="team">Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17</ref>.

This article will introduce the concept of social loafing and the underlying theories that explain the phenomenon and the factors affecting it. Furthermore, the relation to project, program, and portfolio management will be described as well as practical ways of reducing the effect of social loafing. Lastly, limitations of the theory and the research will be explored.

= Big Idea =

=== Social Loafing and Motivation ===
Social loafing is a social psychology theory that describes “the reduction in motivation and effort when individuals work collectively compared with when they work individually or coactively” <ref name="meta">Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.</ref> Social loafing is, thereby, a concept that affects individual motivation, group dynamics, and team performance.

According to the PMBOK guide, people perform better when motivated and are motivated by different factors. They describe motivation as being either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation comes from within the individual, i.e., the feeling of achievement or the feeling of making a difference, while extrinsic motivation is found from an external source, i.e., praise or bonuses. Knowing how to motivate project team members is an important task of the project manager as it can elicit more effective engagement, higher team performance, and thereby better project outcomes <ref name="PMBOK">Project Management: A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK guide), 7th edition (2021)</ref>.

Social loafing refers to a motivation loss and can be explained by several different theories, described later in the article. The opposite of social loafing is a gain of motivation, referred to as either the Köhler effect or social compensation. These effects describe the tendency to exert more effort into a project, when you expect the teammates to perform moderately better at a task than you, or when you expect them to perform worse than you on what you deem as an important task <ref name="faci">Karau, S. J. (2012) Social Loafing (and Facilitation). ''Encyclopedia of Human Behavior: Second Edition.'' Elsevier Inc. Pages 486-492. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-375000-6.00335-9</ref>.

[[File:Rindelmann_effect.png|frame|right|300x300px| Visualization of the Ringelmann Effect <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

=== History ===
The first experiment of social loafing was done in the 1880s by a French agricultural engineer called Max Ringelmann. He conducted a series of experiments where groups of varying sizes were to pull a rope while he measured the total pulling force. He had expected that the total pulling force would increase with the same amount when increasing the number of group members, as the total pulling force would be the sum of the individuals’ performance. However, he found that when the group size increased the newly added pulling force was increasingly less. This has been named the Ringelmann effect.

This was explained by either a coordination loss by the participants in larger groups or by a motivation loss. In the 1970s these explanations were separated and evidence of motivation loss in groups was found, and thereby the term social loafing was substantiated. Since then, a lot of research and experiments on the topic have been conducted, to find the causes and ways of reducing the phenomenon <ref name ="faci"/>.

=== Theories of Social Loafing ===
The explanation for the concept of social loafing can be found in different social psychology theories. In 1993 Karau and Williams published an article called “Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytical Review and Theoretical Integration” where they analyzed 78 previous studies on social loafing and interpreted them into a model. The study presents different theories that could explain the concept of social loafing as well as the model they created. Five of these theories and the model they created will be summarized in the following section using both the article from Karau and Williams and a chapter in a book written by Karau. <ref name ="meta"/><ref name ="chapter"/>

==== Social Impact Theory ====
In the social impact theory, people are seen as either a source or a target of social influence, and the amount of social influence depends on the strength, immediacy, and the number of sources and targets present. The number of sources increases the social impact while the number of targets reduces it. By working alone as a target, all the social influence of outside sources is directed at you, however, in a group setting the source of social influence is divided on to the different team members or targets. Therefore, the amount of responsibility experienced by the individuals in a team is less than when working individually. Social loafing will, therefore, be more present in larger groups as opposed to smaller ones <ref name="chapter">Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X</ref>.

==== Arousal Reduction ====
The arousal reduction theory is an extension of the social impact theory. Again, people can either serve as sources or co-targets of social impact, with the distinguishment between coactive and collective tasks. In a coactive task, individuals work alone in the presence of others that act as a source of influence. In a collective task, individuals work together and serve as co-targets of social impact. The theory argues that when performing a simple task individuals perform better when working coactively, while the opposite is true for complex tasks <ref name ="chapter"/>.

==== Evaluation Potential ====
The evaluation potential theory proposes that social loafing is more likely to occur when it is not possible to identify the work of the individual. Working in a team can allow the individual to feel more anonymous and thereby not be made directly responsible for a bad outcome. On the other hand, it also comes with a loss of individual credit, which can lower the motivation of the person. Therefore, a reduction in social loafing can be made by making the individuals’ work in a team identifiable <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Dispensability of Effort ====
The dispensability of effort theory suggests that individuals may exert less effort when working in teams as they feel that their inputs to the group work are not essential in achieving a high-quality end result, meaning that their work is dispensable. However, this reduction in effort can happen even though the individual's work is identifiable, and it, therefore, contradicts the evaluation potential theory <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Matching of Effort ====
The matching of effort theory suggests that when working in a team, people tend to match their teammates' efforts. Thereby social loafing occurs when individuals think that others in the group are going to slack. This follows research done about job attitudes, where it was found that individuals’ attitudes and motivation towards a task were highly influenced by their co-workers <ref name ="meta"/>.

==== Collective Effort Model ====
Based on the different theories of social loafing from the meta-analytical review, a model of individual motivation in groups was created by Karau and Williams called the Collective Effort Model (CEM). It is based on an individual-level expectancy-value model of effort created by Vroom with added elements from the social identity and self-evaluation theories. In the original model, the motivation is dependent on three factors; expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. Theses terms are described as: "(a) expectancy, or the degree to which high levels of effort are expected to lead to high levels of performance, (b) instrumentality, or the degree to which high-quality performance is perceived as instrumental in obtaining an outcome, and (c) valence of the outcome, or the degree to which the outcome is viewed as desirable."<ref name ="meta"/>

The CEM is an expansion of this for motivation on collective tasks as Karau and Williams found that motivation in collective tasks was not as simple as individual tasks and that collective tasks included more contingencies or barriers. Because of these extra contingencies, individuals are more likely to engage in social loafing on collective tasks. Based on the studies done previously, they found other factors that affected motivation in groups that did not affect individual motivation. For example, the performance of other group members and the diffusion of group outcome on the different group members. Also cultural, personality, situational, and individual differences affected the motivation as well as group variation. <ref name ="chapter"/>

[[File:Social_loafing_factors.png|frame|right|300x300px| Factors affecting social loafing <ref name="mig">Lærke Viuff Petersen (2022) </ref>]]

''Addition of Figure to complement and improve the Collective Effort Model explanation''

==== Free Riding and Sucker Effect ====

Together with the Social Loafing Effect, there are two other effects that emerge with it, and can contribute to get a better overview of what Social Loafing means and what it can produce to the whole group, not only to an individual.

== Factors Affecting Social Loafing ==
Several different factors affecting social loafing have been determined through experimental studies. These factors and the implications will be described in the following section.

'''Task Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the task value increases. This follows the intrinsic motivation model, as the motivation will increase if the team member feels that the project is important or that they are making a difference. As an example, a research and development team is less likely to loaf, than a team working on a routine job, as the intrinsic value is greater for the research and development team <ref name="team" />.

'''Redundancy'''

An increase in social loafing is found the more redundant the contribution of a team member is. This means that the more unique the task is, the tendency to loaf is decreased. Therefore, social loafing is more prevalent in monodisciplinary teams as opposed to multidisciplinary teams. In monodisciplinary teams, everyone is capable of the same and their role can thereby feel redundant, whereas the roles in a multidisciplinary team are unique <ref name="team" />.

'''Evaluation'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the individuals in the team are evaluated, given feedback or when their work is identifiable. This follows the evaluation potential theory. If the individual’s work is not identifiable, there is a loss of responsibility and thereby it is easier to loaf <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Value'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when the group value increases. Group value could include more familiar team members, high group cohesion, or strong group identity. When the group feels valuable to the individual, it is seen as more desirable to stay in the group and the individual will therefore be less likely to loaf. <ref name="team" />.

'''Group Size'''

An increase in social loafing is found when increasing the group size. This is found as the responsibility is divided onto several people in larger groups, following the social impact theory, and it is, therefore, easier for the individual to hide in the crowd. A reduction of social loafing is therefore found in smaller groups <ref name="team" />.

'''Culture'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for western cultures compared to eastern cultures. This is explained by eastern cultures being more collectively oriented than western cultures. A study was conducted that found that Israeli and Chinese participants worked harder on group tasks, whereas the American participants worked harder on individual tasks <ref name="team" />.

'''Gender'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be higher for men compared to women. This is again explained by women being more collectively oriented than men <ref name="team" />.

'''Expectations of Others'''

A decrease in social loafing is found when they expect other team members to perform badly. In a study, they found that when team members announced that they were going to work hard other team members were more likely to loaf, and opposite when they announced, they were not going to work hard, the other team members loafed less <ref name="team" />.

'''Personality'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less in people who score high in need for achievement or work ethic. It is also found that individuals who feel superior to others are more likely to loaf compared to individuals with average self-beliefs. This is thought to be because the individual who feels superior believes that a lower effort will be enough for them to produce an adequate performance <ref name ="chapter"/>.

'''Communication'''

The effect of social loafing is found to be less with higher communication quality. In a study, it was found that more than 53% of the variance in social loafing could be explained by communication quality and task cohesion. They found that this could be because open and honest communication allows the individuals to easier express their contribution to the project, and thereby increase the evaluation potential. Furthermore, it allowed the individuals to feel heard and valued by the other team members <ref name="com">Lam, C. (2015) The Role of Communication and Cohesion in Reducing Social Loafing in Group Projects. ''Business and Professional Communication Quarterly.'' Vol. 78(4), pages 454-475. DOI: 10.1177/2329490615596417</ref>.

'''Fatigue''' <ref name ="Fatigue">Baranski, Joseph v., Megan M. Thompson, Frederick M.J. Lichacz, Carol McCann, Valerie Gil, Luigi Pastò, and Ross A. Pigeau. 2016. ‘Effects of Sleep Loss on Team Decision Making: Motivational Loss or Motivational Gain?’ Https://Doi-Org.Proxy.Findit.Cvt.Dk/10.1518/001872007X215728 49 (4): 646–60. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X215728.</ref>

'''Knowledge''' <ref name ="Knowledge">Duong, Nam Tien, and Thuy Dung Pham Thi. 2022. ‘The Influence of Perceived Social Loafing on Knowledge Sharing Intentions among College Students’. Obrazovanie i Nauka 24 (5): 41–63. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2022-5-41-63.</ref>

''- Complement each factor or cause in order to have a better understanding of why the effect of Social Loafing is produced and to be aware that it can arise unintentionally.

''- Addition and explanation of two important factors (Fatigue and Knowledge) in teamwork that directly affect team performance and are worth considering in terms of causes.

''- Figure update of how the causes are related and how this can lead help to implement solutions from a managerial perspective''

= Application =

=== Social Loafing in Project, Program, and Portfolio Management ===
Most tasks in organizations are done collectively, so teams are ubiquitous in both project, program, and portfolio management. A study conducted by Kirkman et al. in 1996 asked 486 employees that worked in teams what their three biggest worries about working in a team were. Here, evidence was found that one of the biggest worries was social loafing, as 25 percent of the comments made were about social loafing. For example, the employees worried about having to work extra to compensate for slower team members. Therefore, the challenge of social loafing is important and deserves attention, in order to improve the performance of team members. To do this, the manager needs to understand the causes of social loafing, when to consider it, and ways of reducing it. <ref name="team" />

When comparing what has been described in this article to the ISO standard 21502, the challenge of social loafing can be found in resource management, specifically human resources. Therefore, an impact on social loafing could be made when establishing, developing, and managing the team. When establishing the team, team members are chosen, and the roles and responsibilities are divided. Here, the project manager should consider skills, expertise, culture, cost, and group dynamics. As mentioned before, some of these are factors in the level of social loafing and could thereby impact the effect of social loafing. However, the project manager is not always in control of choosing the team members. Therefore, in the development of the team phase, the aim is to help the team members work in a cohesive and collaborative manner. In the development of the team, it can be necessary to try and improve the performance and interactions of the team members, to enhance teamwork and motivation. The aim of managing the team is to keep them motivated and make them feel involved and make sure they perform at their best. The project manager’s job is to optimize the team members’ performance by i.e. providing feedback and encouraging collaborative work <ref name="iso" />. This follows the evaluation potential theory that describes a motivational loss with the lack of feedback, and thereby more social loafing.

=== Impact of Social Loafing in project development ===

<ref name="In Projects">Chen, Zhen. 2022. ‘The Impact of Megaproject Stakeholders’ Psychological Ownership on Cooperative Innovation Performance: Territorial Behavior and Social Loafing as Mediator’. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5536516.</ref>

== Reducing Social Loafing ==
Based on the underlying theories and studies of social loafing described in this article, practical initiatives for the project manager can be identified. These initiatives can be used when establishing, developing, and managing the team to reduce the effect of social loafing.

* Create smaller teams
* Create multidisciplinary teams
* Include people with high work ethics
* Include women and people from eastern cultures
* Make sure the team members are familiar and have a strong group identity
* Make sure the project is important to the team
* Create unique tasks and roles within the team that are essential
* Make the individual team members’ work identifiable
* Give individual credit and feedback
* Have open and honest communication

=== Solutions from a managerial perspective ===
<ref name ="Managerial">Vveinhardt, Jolita, and Justina Banikonytė. 2017. ‘Managerial Solutions That Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing’. Management of Organizations: Systematic Research 78 (1): 109–29. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019.</ref>

=== Importance of Leadership ===

<ref name ="Leadership">Baker, Elizabeth White and Thompson, Ronald. 2014. ‘Impacts of Organizational Behavior on IT Project Teams: Leadership’s Impact on Social Loafing’.</ref>

= Limitations =

Social loafing is a phenomenon that has been observed in more than 130 experimental studies. It has been tested on different types of tasks and by different populations and is thought to be a very robust social phycological concept <ref name ="chapter"/>.

However, the way that the experiments have been conducted has been criticized. Most of the studies done on social loafing rely on laboratory groups as opposed to real-life groups. Laboratory groups are randomly picked groups in controlled settings, with a limited existence, thereby they do not have a past or a future. They are also not embedded in organizations as groups normally would be in the real world and are only set to perform one simple task. Most of the studies are done with students, so less is known about social loafing in organizational teams with more complex tasks. It is therefore not possible to predict how people would act on multiple tasks; if a person will loaf on one project and then compensate in another, or if people are less inclined to loaf if they know they have to work with the same people on a future project. A study was conducted about social loafing with real life groups, where the members had known each other for at least 6 months. 16 conditions were tested where the groups either were with or without goals, communication, rewards, or collectivist values. Here, they only found evidence of social loafing 1 in the 16 conditions. Therefore, more experiments with real-life groups are needed to get a fully comprehensive view of social loafing <ref name ="team"/>.

Another way studies have been done is either by the participants self-reporting whether they social loaf or by the perception of whether team members social loaf. A study showed that 3.7% admitted to personally engage in social loafing while 35.7% believe that the others in their group were socially loafing. This difference in numbers indicates that people are less likely to admit to social loafing and the results of self-reporting studies can, therefore, be underestimated. <ref name="naval">Piezon, S. L. and Ferree, W. D. (2008) Perceptions of Social Loafing in Online Learning Groups: A study of Public University and U.S. Naval War College students . ''International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning.'' Volume 9, Number 2</ref> Therefore, the best way to conduct studies with social loafing would be to use real-life teams with objective reporting.

Most of the core research about social loafing was done in the 1970s and 1980s but articles are still being published about the topic. Then the studies were more about the causes and factors, while today the research is more focused on social loafing in different industries and with different technology. For example, social loafing in human-robot interactions and social loafing in virtual teams have been studied recently.<ref name="virtual">Rober, L. P. (2020) Behavior‒output control theory, trust and social loafing in virtual teams. ''Multimodal Technologies and Interaction.'' Volume 4, Issue 3, page 1-22. DOI: 10.3390/mti4030039</ref> <ref name="robot"> Onnasch, L.; Panayotidis, T. (2020) Social Loafing with Robots – An Empirical Investigation ''Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting'' Volume 64, Issue 1, page 97-101</ref> However, the understanding of social loafing and technology is still limited, so more research needs to be done.<ref name ="virtual"/> The knowledge about social loafing keeps evolving and new factors and ways of reducing social loafing keep getting proved or disproved.

= Annotated Bibliography =
* Karau, S. & Williams, K. (1993). Social Loafing: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' 65, 681-706.

This article is a meta-analytical review of 78 studies done about social loafing. In the article, they summarize the classical theories of social loafing and go through the characteristics and results of the previous literature. They use the analytical review to create the Collective Effort Model that is described in this article.

* Karau, S. J., Wilhau, A. J. (2020) Chapter 1 – Social Loafing and Motivation Gains in Groups: An Integrative Review. Karau, S. J. ''Individual Motivation within Groups.'' Academic Press. Pages 3-51. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-849867-5.00001-X

This is a chapter in a book about individual motivation within groups. It gives an in-depth overview of social loafing, the classical theories, the factors that affect it, and motivation gains in groups. It is written by one of the same authors as the meta-analytical review, so it covers some of the same topics, but is newer and, therefore, includes more recent studies.

* Rutte, C. G. (2008) Chapter 17 – Social Loafing in Team. ''International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working.'' wiley. Pages 361-378. DOI: 10.1002/9780470696712.ch17

This is a chapter in the International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working. The chapter covers social loafing in relation to teams and organizations. It also covers some of the theories of social loafing and describes possible remedies against social loafing in teams.

= References =
<references />

[[Category:''People'']]

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T02:41:50Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Group dynamics */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T02:39:24Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

[[File:Abstract.png|220px|thumb|right|Graphical Abstract]]

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

[[File:Interdependecies.png|200px|thumb|right|Example of interdependencies among group members. Figure based on references <ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> ]]

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

[[File:Belbin.png|600px|thumb|right|The Nine Belbin Team Roles. Figure based on reference <ref name="BELBIN"/> ]]
By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.
[[File:SMART-SOCIAL LOAFING.png|200px|thumb|RIGHT|S.M.A.R.T acronym, figure based on reference <ref name="SMART" />]]
'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*
[[File:Star Model.png|500px|thumb|RIGHT|Star Model by Jay R. Galbraith. Figure based on reference <ref name="STAR " />]]
'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

File:Star Model.png

2023-05-11T02:36:38Z

CarolinaValderrama:

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T02:36:15Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

[[File:Abstract.png|220px|thumb|right|Graphical Abstract]]

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

[[File:Interdependecies.png|200px|thumb|right|Example of interdependencies among group members. Figure based on references <ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> ]]

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

[[File:Belbin.png|600px|thumb|right|The Nine Belbin Team Roles. Figure based on reference <ref name="BELBIN"/> ]]
By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.
[[File:SMART-SOCIAL LOAFING.png|200px|thumb|RIGHT|S.M.A.R.T acronym, figure based on reference <ref name="SMART" />]]
'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

File:SMART-SOCIAL LOAFING.png

2023-05-11T02:33:35Z

CarolinaValderrama:

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T02:31:53Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

[[File:Abstract.png|220px|thumb|right|Graphical Abstract]]

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

[[File:Interdependecies.png|200px|thumb|right|Example of interdependencies among group members. Figure based on references <ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> ]]

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

[[File:Belbin.png|600px|thumb|right|The Nine Belbin Team Roles. Figure based on reference <ref name="BELBIN"/> ]]
By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

File:Belbin.png

2023-05-11T02:26:44Z

CarolinaValderrama:

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T02:26:14Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Group dynamics */

= Abstract =

[[File:Abstract.png|220px|thumb|right|Graphical Abstract]]

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

[[File:Interdependecies.png|200px|thumb|right|Example of interdependencies among group members. Figure based on references <ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> ]]

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

File:Interdependecies.png

2023-05-11T02:23:57Z

CarolinaValderrama:

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T02:22:55Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Abstract */

= Abstract =

[[File:Abstract.png|220px|thumb|right|Graphical Abstract]]

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

File:Abstract.png

2023-05-11T02:19:49Z

CarolinaValderrama:

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T01:19:14Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator

'''Thinking roles'''

#Plant
#Monitor Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T00:59:02Z

CarolinaValderrama:

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

#Monitor
#Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

#Gil, F. (n.d.). Social Loafing.: This article is a good first approach to the concept, as it provides a comprehensive, complete and very easy-to-understand overview when first reading about the phenomenon of social loafing. It provides important concepts to understand how it arises, its history and its relationship within the organisational context.
#Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. : After the discovery of social loafing, this study is one of the best approaches to testing the theory established by the Ringelman effect. There are two experiments that prove how this phenomenon applies in a different context than the one in which it was discovered. They added two experiments related to sound emission to the original rope experiment. Both the experiments and the results are interesting to analyse and reflect on as they relate and apply to the organisational context.
#Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. : Following in chronological order the study of the phenomenon of social loafing, this meta-analysis studies the causes that generate it, based on the study made by Latané in 1979. It integrates the theory of social impact and briefly proposes points of action to reduce and eliminate social loafing within work groups.
#Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017).: Among all the references related to this topic, this article provides solutions directly related to the organisational context. It is interesting how the analysis is structured and the results of the studies with people, through interviews and feedback of the executed plans, under the perception of real employees, within real work contexts.
#Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics and George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior: In relation to the study of organizational behaviour, these two books provide a complete explanation of the importance of human behaviour within an organization, group dynamics, interdependence between members and the process that must be carried out as a team to meet the organisational objectives.

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T00:09:04Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

#Monitor
#Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by Jay R. Galbraith and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T00:07:23Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

#Monitor
#Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, #what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by JAY R. GALBRAITH and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behaviour of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-11T00:04:53Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Program Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

#Monitor
#Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, #what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by JAY R. GALBRAITH and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

#Level 1: Initial Process
#Level 2: Structured Process and Standards
#Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process
#Level 4: Managed Process
#Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

#Project Integration Management
#Scope Management: Change Control
#Time Management: Schedule Development
#Cost Management: Resource Planning
#Cost Management: Cost Control
#Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning
#Communication Management
#Risk Management
#Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

*''''' Sense of purpose'''''

For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well.

'''''MODEL:''' Benefits Realization Management (BRM)''

Benefits realization management (BRM) provides organizations with a way to measure how projects and programs add true value to the enterprise. (CITA BRM) The BRM Framework has been developed by the Project Management Institute to help organisations to manage and deliver project benefits effectively. It provides a series of guidelines and best practices that can be used by project, programme and portfolio management practitioners and leaders. The framework serves as a guiding tool for identifying, analysing, delivering and sustaining benefits that are aligned with the organisation's strategic goals and objectives.

It is divided into three simple phases:

#Identify: A look at the practices performed at the start of a project or program that enable organizations to identify expected benefits.
#Execute: A look at practices that enable organizations to deliver the expected benefits.
#Sustain: A look at the practices that enable organizations to sustain benefits and achieve strategic objectives

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The BRM framework focuses on continuous monitoring and tracking of benefits throughout the project lifecycle. Managers can use this to evaluate individual and team performance on a regular basis, detect any signs of social loafing and address them promptly.

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

*'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T23:45:02Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

#Resource Investigator
#Teamworker
#Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

#Monitor
#Evaluator
#Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

#Shaper
#Implementer
#Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. ''S.M.A.R.T.'' is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

#Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, #what, where, when, and why.
#Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.
#Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.
#Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.
#Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

*''''' Team Development'''''

Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.

'''''MODEL:''' Tuckman's stages of team development model''

Tuckman's original work simply described the way he had observed groups evolve, whether they were conscious of it or not. <ref name = "WCU"> Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development - WCU of PA. West Chester University, from https://www.wcupa.edu/coral/tuckmanStagesGroupDelvelopment.aspx</ref> He defined a model of five stages that explains that as a team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and leadership style changes to more collaborative or shared leadership.

Each of the five phases has different behaviours, thoughts, needs and requirements and are commonly known as:

#Forming: the initial stage of putting the structure of the team together.
#Storming: interpersonal conflicts arise
#Norming: the group develops cohesion.
#Performing: individuals adapt to meet the needs of other team members.
#Adjourning: the team experience change and transition.

'''BENEFIT:''' Understanding Tuckman's Stages of Group Development helps managers actively intervene at each stage to avoid social loafing. This model relates directly to promoting positive group dynamics to achieve group synergy.

*'''''Decision-Making'''''
When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

'''''MODEL:''' The Star Model''

The Star Model™ framework for organization design is the foundation on which a company bases its design choices. The framework consists of a series of design policies that are controllable by management and can influence employee behaviour. <ref name = "STAR"> Galbraith, J. R. (n.d.). THE STAR MODELTM.</ref>

The model was designed by JAY R. GALBRAITH and it is divided into five categories:

#Strategy, which determines direction.
#Structure, which determines the location of decision-making power.
#Processes, which have to do with the flow of information
#Rewards, which influence the motivation of people to perform and address organizational goals.
#People (human resource policies), which influence and define the employees’ mindsets and skills.

'''''BENEFIT:''''' The Star Model™ consists of policies that managers can control and that can affect employees’ behaviour, using it to overcome the negatives of any structural design.<ref name="STAR" />

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

*'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:31:13Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

*'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:27:31Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

*'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

*'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:26:39Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = "BSC"> Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:25:44Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = “BSC">Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance" </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:25:00Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Limitations */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = “Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance"> </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:24:18Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Limitations */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = “Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance"> </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

Although it is not directly named in the standards, Social Loafing is implicit as a consequence of poor practice at an organisational level. Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.
Moreover, for as long as this phenomenon has been studied, there have been debates about the importance and depth it deserves in relation to human behaviour. Many thought that group dynamics was a private matter, not something that scientists should expose to public scrutiny. Others thought that human behaviour was too complex to be studied scientifically and that this complexity was greatly magnified when groups of interacting individuals became the object of interest. Still, others thought that the causes of group behaviour were so obvious that they did not merit scientific attention.<ref name=" " />

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T22:04:54Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

'''''MODEL:''' Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)''

Senior executives understand that their organization’s measurement system strongly affects the behavior of managers and employees. The balanced scorecard allows managers to look at the business from four important perspectives. <ref name = “Kaplan, R. S., Norton, D. P. The Balanced Scorecard—Measures that Drive Performance"> </ref>

The Balanced Scorecard has two fundamental objectives. First, it unifies various components of a company's competitive agenda into a comprehensive management report, such as customer orientation, response time, quality improvement, teamwork, product release efficiency and long-term management. Second, it avoids sub-optimisation by allowing senior management to assess the impact of improvements in one area on other important operational measures.

'''BENEFIT:''' The overall benefit is that by considering all the important measures together, the balanced scorecard provides a holistic view of organisational performance, allowing managers to take action in a realistic and global approach.

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

*MAIN IDEA: Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T21:50:28Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Program Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

*''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

'''Levels of Maturity'''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

- Level 1: Initial Process

- Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

- Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

- Level 4: Managed Process

- Level 5: Optimizing Process

'''Key Areas'''

- Project Integration Management

- Scope Management: Change Control

- Time Management: Schedule Development

- Cost Management: Resource Planning

- Cost Management: Cost Control

- Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

- Communication Management

- Risk Management

- Procurement Management

'''''BENEFIT:''' Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.''

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

*MAIN IDEA: In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

*MODEL: Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

*MAIN IDEA: Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T21:47:46Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Program Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

''''' Continuous improvement'''''

Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

'''''MODEL:''' Maturity Model''

Maturity models are simplified representations of an organization’s ability to continuously improve in a specific discipline. It assesses how successfully a company evolves from a particular criteria, enabling the managers to examine a company’s maturity state.

An example of the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model is shown in the Figure.

It based on a two-dimensional framework. Both of the dimensions are based on accepted industry standards. The first dimension reflects the level of maturity. The second dimension depicts the key areas of project management addressed. <ref name = “MATURITY">Project management maturity. (n.d.). Retrieved May 10, 2023, from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/pm-maturity-industry-wide-assessment-9000</ref>

''Levels of Maturity''

There are five levels of maturity included in the PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model.

-Level 1: Initial Process

-Level 2: Structured Process and Standards

-Level 3: Organizational Standards and Institutionalized Process

-Level 4: Managed Process

-Level 5: Optimizing Process

''Key Areas''

Project Integration Management

-Scope Management: Change Control

-Time Management: Schedule Development

-Cost Management: Resource Planning

-Cost Management: Cost Control

-Human Resource Management: Organizational Planning

-Communication Management

-Risk Management

-Procurement Management

BENEFIT: Maturity models allow organisations to better identify opportunities for improvement by identifying current levels, deficiencies and strengths. Clearly defined levels enable self-evaluation and create strategies to encourage growth and performance improvement.

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

*MAIN IDEA: In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

*MODEL: Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

*MAIN IDEA: Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T21:22:27Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Application */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

'''''MODEL:''' S.M.A.R.T''

In 1981, George T. Doran published a paper arguing about the importance of goals and the challenge of setting them. **S.M.A.R.T.** is an acronym that stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. It is a framework with the criteria to guide in the setting of goals that are assumed to give better results in team performance.

When setting goals they should be:

- Specific: target a specific area for improvement. Goals should be clear and specific, clearly stating what needs to be accomplished. They should answer the questions of who, what, where, when, and why.

- Measurable: quantify or at least suggest an indicator of progress. There should be quantifiable criteria or metrics in place to determine when the goal has been achieved.

- Achievable: Goals should be realistic and feasible. They should take into account available resources, skills, and time constraints. Setting goals that are too challenging or unattainable can lead to frustration and demotivation.

- Relevant: make sense within the job function. Goals should be relevant and aligned with the broader goals of the individual, team, or organization. They should contribute to the overall success and be meaningful within the given context.

- Time-related: specify when the result(s) can be achieved. Goals should have a specific timeframe or deadline attached to them. This helps create a sense of urgency and provides a clear target for completion. Time-bound goals enable effective planning and prioritization.<ref name = "SMART">Doran, G. T. (1981). "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives". *Management Review*. **70** (11): 35–36</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' This model allows managers to ensure that goals can be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. This increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved and helps people stay focused and motivated throughout the goal-setting process.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

''''' Continuous improvement'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

*MODEL: Program management maturity model

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

*MAIN IDEA: In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

*MODEL: Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

*MAIN IDEA: Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T20:30:52Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

= Abstract =

It is assumed that working with others in a group has an energizing effect, motivating people to work hard. But this only occurs when collective efforts are rewarded and when people are willing to cooperate with each other. <ref name ="Gil"> Social Loafing. Gil, Francisco. (2004). Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 3.</ref>
Unfortunately, what is experienced in group work can be completely different, as people are not always willing to do their best. Therefore, they inhibit themselves from making a significant contribution, while remaining unnoticed by the rest of the group. This is known as '''''Social Loafing''''', which despite having been studied for years, has recently become popular due to the need for organizations to understand ''underperformance'' and ''loss of productivity''.

As time goes by, it is increasingly important to focus on a company's human resources, their well-being and the impact this has on a company’s performance. In recent decades, people have become more important for both human and legal reasons, even surpassing the economic benefits that any company may offer. Therefore, managers have found it necessary to strengthen their skills in the psychological field, social skills, and leadership to understand and properly manage their teams to achieve the expected performance.

Effective management is not just about achieving goals, but also about understanding and influencing the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of the people within the organization. <ref name="Greenberg">Greenberg, J., & Baron, R. A. (2008). Behavior in organizations: Understanding and managing the human side of work. Prentice Hall.</ref> This article will therefore focus on the importance that managers and leaders be aware of the contributing factors to Social Loafing and take proactive actions to address it in an organization. It aims to suggest effective models and tools for organizations to implement in order to create a culture of accountability, collaboration, and high performance that supports achieving strategic goals and objectives in projects, programs, and portfolios, suggesting different models and tools for each level of management.

= Big Idea =

Social loafing has been studied for years, but it was only in the last few decades that it became relevant for managers in organizational settings. Time after the establishment of the concept with the Ringelman Effect. In 1979, Latané, Williams and Harkins proved the notion of social loafing with the saying “Many hands make light the work”, paving the way for multiple research on its causes and consequences in the organizational setting.

They framed the concept in a way that has allowed it to be approached from a different perspective since then, which is, in part, the basis on which this article is written. They defined it as a ''"social disease"'' which has evident negative consequences in the social context. It results in a reduction in human efficiency, which leads to lowered profits and lowered benefits for all.<ref name="Latane"> Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many Hands Make Light the Work: The Causes and Consequences of Social Loafing. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*, *37*(6), 822–832.</ref> Thus, from a managerial perspective, anything that causes a loss of profit needs to be addressed.

As a ''"disease"'' related mainly to groups and collective effort, it might seem easy to avoid group work as the most effective ''"cure"'', and focus on individual collaborations. However, groups are necessary because they make it possible to achieve a large number of goals that would not be possible if each person worked on their own. Collective action is a vital aspect of our lives. From time immemorial, it has made possible the construction of monuments, and today it is essential for providing even our food and shelter,<ref name="Latane" /> and develop the most recent technologies. Therefore, the solution or "cure" must be to understand and reorient the group dynamics in such a way that the group promotes a greater sense of individual responsibility rather than diluting it. This represents a great opportunity for managers to apply a range of strategies with great success.

Reduction of social loafing in the organization and increase of group synergy are integral objectives of human resource management, setting high requirements to the quality of managerial solutions.<ref name ="Managerial"> Managerial Solutions that Increase the Effect of Group Synergy and Reduce Social Loafing. Vveinhardt, J., & Banikonytė, J. (2017). Management of Organizations: Systematic Research, 78(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1515/MOSR-2017-0019 </ref> In 2017, a new study was conducted, where the beliefs and behaviours of employees that cause or reduce loafing were analyzed. Focusing on the root cause and recurrence of these sources, they established that the opposite of Social Loafing is '''''Group Synergy''''' and how the level of involvement is key in this context. Two new effects, also supported by Gil in 2004, can then be seen to be important in the process of identifying Social Loafing and are key to the development of management strategies. '''''“Free Riding”''''', occurs when individuals who have not made appropriate contributions to the task profit from the contributions of other group members and the '''''“Sucker Effect”''''' when individuals decide to reduce their own effort and input to group performance (and hence diminish the reinforcements they could receive) instead of being ''‘‘suckers’’'' and letting themselves be exploited by ''"free riders"''. <ref name="Gil" />

Among the findings, in the 2017 study, they developed a framework that includes key action plans for managers on how to avoid Social Loafing and achieve Group Synergy in teams within organizations. Research shows that managers of organizations can be trained in how to deal with the issues of synergy in group activities. <ref name="Managerial" /> According to these studies, it is necessary to have team loyalty, to introduce clear and commonly agreed goals and a long-term perspective to highlight the team members' interdependence and future-oriented efforts, to compare their team with others to stimulate constructive competition, and to create identity by making the team visible to the members and by creating meaningful tasks that the team is proud of.

This framework, together with the suggested ways to reduce or overcome Social Loafing in natural environments, proposed by Karau in 1993 as a result of a meta-analysis, will be the basis of this article to propose the use of different models at each level of management and thus provide a closer and more detailed guide on how managers can deal with this phenomenon by applying managerial solutions in a direct and effective way.

Minimising loafing within an organisation requires an understanding of the underlying causes of this phenomenon and the ways in which managers are directly related to it, as there are high expectations placed on them by organisations. Since this article is primarily based on a managerial approach, the following sections will focus on managers and their performance, and further reading on the causes of social loafing is recommended, as described in the section of the annotated bibliography below.

===Group dynamics===

Many of the most important tasks in life can only be carried out in a group, and many of them are collective tasks that require the sharing of the contributions of each of its members.<ref name ="Meta-analysis"> Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.</ref> As previously mentioned, social loafing has been considered a social "disease" related mainly to groups, and as known, from the people perspective of project management, “Projects are made by people and for people!”, seen as a collection of individuals, with their own identities, expert knowledge, interests, feelings, personalities, friendships, etc.<ref name ="PROJECTLAB"> ProjectLab. Our perspectives - Doing projects, from https://www.doing-projects.org/perspectives.</ref> Thus for a manager, understanding the basic concept of a group, how the interaction between its members works, and getting to understand the members themselves is key to leading and managing them. In this way, a manager can achieve a balance between individual and group behaviour, building a team, in order to create a positive working environment in the organisation, by also directing their actions towards achieving expected performance within a project, program or portfolio.

According to Forsyth, some of the definitions of the word '''group''' stress the importance of communication or mutual dependence.<ref name ="GROUP-DYNAMICS">Forsyth, D. R. (2014). Group Dynamics (Sixth). University of Richmond, from http://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf </ref> While others suggest that what turns an individual into a genuine group, is a shared purpose or goal, the majority agree that groups come into existence when people become linked together by some type of relationship.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> Regardless of the nature of this relationship, a group exists when individuals are connected to one another by some type of social tie. Therefore, Forsyth precisely defines a group as ''“two or more individuals who are connected by and within social relationships.”''

When people are linked by a relationship they become interdependent, for they can influence one another’s thoughts, actions, emotions and outcomes.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> In an organisational context, these relationships are primarily based on task-related interdependencies and can be either strengthened or weakened according to the degree of affinity and understanding that individuals develop during their time of interaction.

Because collective work settings are so pervasive and indispensable, it is important to determine which factors motivate and demotivate individuals within these collective contexts.<ref name="Meta-analysis" /> '''Task interaction''' includes all group behaviour that is focused primarily on the group’s work, projects, plans, and goals. In most groups, members must coordinate their various skills, resources, and motivations so that the group can make a decision, generate a product or achieve a victory.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" /> For both managers and co-workers, it is equally important to know and have clarity about what kind of interdependence is being managed in the organisation. (FIGURE X) As a result, the group members are able to align their efforts, communicate effectively and work towards shared goals. It allows them to anticipate dependencies, collaborate effectively and make informed decisions to achieve optimal results while encouraging accountability, as members recognise the impact of their work on others and the importance of their contributions to the group's success.

In 1951, a psychologist named Kurt Lewin described '''group dynamics''' as a process where groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances. Later on, Forsyth used this definition as the basis for defining group dynamics as the influential actions, processes, and changes that occur within and between groups.<ref name="GROUP-DYNAMICS" />

Organizations exist to provide goods and services that people want, and the amount and quality of these goods and services are products of the behaviours and performance of an organization’s employees.<ref name ="OB"> George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior. Pearson Education, 6th Edition.</ref> However, the effectiveness of the group activities varies constantly, therefore, '''unity''' and '''synergy''' are often one of the main tasks of group work organization, which both the heads of the group and the entire organization have to solve.<ref name="Managerial" /> Group synergy is usually the result of positive group dynamics. When team members collaborate in an effective way, they can build on each other's strengths, compensate for each other's weaknesses and generate new ideas and perspectives. Research shows that synergy not only helps to achieve a better result in activities but also motivates employees. On the other hand, negative group dynamics can hinder synergy and lead to social loafing. If team members do not communicate effectively or if there is a lack of trust between them, synergy can be difficult to achieve. The reason for this is that team members may be more focused on their individual contributions than on working together as a team. Negative group dynamics can also lead to conflict and lower motivation among team members, this is where the manager's efforts and skills are crucial in order to find the balance and achieve unity and synergy within the group.

= Application =

This section outlines the application of management tools to reduce and avoid social loafing at various levels of management within an organisation. Based on the established context, the importance of groups in an organisational environment and the implications of social loafing for managers, an action framework is presented as an incorporation of the different sources linked to the article and the literature associated with the Project Management and Advanced Project, Program and Portfolio Management course. The framework outlines key steps for managers to address social loafing at both individual and group levels. It extends the interrelationship between projects, programs and portfolios defined in ISO 21500, incorporating different management models tailored to each level of management.

Looking ahead, the section aims to provide a comprehensive structure that presents the main ideas of each step to reduce social loafing within each management level (project, program and portfolio). By offering a clearer picture of how to address social loafing, this approach provides managers with practical guidance and helps to ensure that the purpose of each step is applied in a clear and effective way, producing tangible results. The incorporation of specific models for each step is intended to overcome the limitations of the existing studies, which have been primarily focused on non-managerial contexts and often offer ambiguous solutions.

=== Project Level ===

*'''Roles and Responsibilities'''

By suggesting that effective teamwork relies less on qualifications and experience and more on a complementary mixture of interpersonal styles, Meredith Belbin’s original studies introduced an easily-understood framework for analyzing the complex interactions involved in group work and increasing the chances of success in any team endeavour.<ref name ="BELBIN">Belbin, R. M. (2011). Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail (3rd ed.). *Human Resource Management International Digest*, *19*(3), 171–175. https://doi.org/10.1108/HRMID.2011.04419CAE.002/FULL/XML"</ref>

''"The types of behaviour in which people engage are infinite. But the range of useful behaviours, which make an effective contribution to team performance, is finite. These behaviours are grouped into a set number of related clusters, to which the term 'Team Role' is applied."'' Meredith Belbin | Team Roles at Work

'''''MODEL:''' Belbin’s Team role model''

The model identifies nine key roles that individuals play within a team. Each role represents a set of strengths, behaviours and contributions that individuals bring to a team, divided into three categories. The model suggests that for a team to function effectively, it needs a balanced combination of these roles.

'''Social roles'''

- Resource Investigator

- Teamworker

- Co-ordinator Plant

'''Thinking roles'''

- Monitor

- Evaluator

- Specialist

'''Action or Task roles'''

- Shaper

- Implementer

- Completer Finisher

'''''BENEFIT:''''' By knowing the strengths and contributions of each team member, managers can assign roles that match individuals' skills and interests. This reduces the likelihood of individuals engaging in social loafing, as they clearly understand their responsibilities and how their contributions contribute to the success of the team. In addition, the model encourages effective teamwork and collaboration by emphasising the need for a balanced mix of roles within the team.

*''''' Accountability and Goal Setting'''''

'''''MODEL: '''Personal Accountability Model''

The Personal Accountability Model forms the basis of the accountability movement that was started by Mark Samuel in the USA, in 1979 and, in the meantime, this model has also become successful in Latin America and Europe. This model provides insight into what it means to be accountable. How a group member can contribute to their own and their team’s success as an individual. It perfectly reflects what real change brings about.

The model is presented as a road map, composed mainly of two loops, it gives a step-by-step process for avoiding the Victim Loop and stepping onto the Accountability Loop.

The process starts with a situation, based on the “intention”, the person has a “choice”. When taking the Victim Loop, the process would be to ‘ignore’ the situation, ‘deny’ the involvement, and ‘blame’ someone else for the occurrence of the situation. Then the person will ‘rationalize’ and justify why someone else should take care of it and ‘resist’ the possibility of getting involved, and the last action would be to ‘hide’ in order to avoid dealing with the situation. On the other hand, when taking the Accountability Loop the person will start to ‘recognize’ the situation and take ‘ownership’ of facing it. As these situations are mostly challenging the person will then ‘forgive’ anyone who has brought that situation, then will stand in a position to ‘self-examine’ looking for ways of how to contribute to the situation, ‘learn’ and finally ‘take action’ to implement any solution that may arise.<ref name = “ACCOUNTABILITY">Samuel, M. (2012). *Making yourself indispensable : the power of personal accountability*.</ref>

'''''BENEFIT:''''' At an individual level, this model is very important, as it creates a culture of ownership and awareness of members' actions and the impact of individual decisions within the organisational context.

''''' Team Development'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization the most valuable resource is people, and when working in a team, it is important to have a solid foundation in the relationships that are formed. Therefore, encouraging open communication, respect and support among team members help to create a positive team environment that fosters collaboration and reduces the likelihood of social loafing.*

*MODEL: Tuckman's stages of team development model

'''''Communication'''''

*MAIN IDEA: As well as developing a strong and united team is important, communication is relevant not only for this purpose but for team members to identify and address potential issues or concerns early on before they become major problems. This can help to prevent misunderstandings and conflicts that can lead to social loafing.*

*MODEL: Agile Project Management Model
*MODEL: Communication Plan

'''''Decision-Making'''''

*MAIN IDEA: When decision-making is effective within an organization, it can help reduce social loafing by creating a sense of responsibility and ownership of individual tasks and objectives. When group members participate in the decision-making process and provide input into the group's goals and objectives, they are more likely to feel invested in the outcome and motivated to contribute to the group's success.*

*MODEL: Six Sigma Model
*MODEL: The Star Model

=== Program Level ===

''''' Continuous improvement'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Continuous improvement involves a constant effort to improve the different processes, products and services within an organization. When this becomes a focus for organizations, they succeed in creating a culture that values innovation, problem solving and efficiency. And so, when it is possible to involve employees in the success of the team, they are less likely to loaf, because they are motivated to contribute their best effort, knowing that their contributions are valued and appreciated. In addition, continuous improvement efforts can help identify and address the root causes of social loafing, such as unclear expectations, lack of accountability or inadequate training.

*MODEL: Program management maturity model

''''' Sense of purpose'''''

*MAIN IDEA: For people, motivation is crucial when it comes to committing time and effort to a task. So when an employee fails to have a personal connection to the work they are doing, loafing is more likely to occur. This can also be interpreted as a lack of a sense that their contributions are not meaningful. However, when employees understand how their work fits into the big picture and how it helps the organization achieve its goals, they are more likely to feel they have a sense of purpose that is in synergy with their peers and the company and consequently are motivated to do their best work. In addition, a sense of purpose can help create a culture of accountability, a point that connects to goal setting as well. When employees understand how their work contributes to the success of the organization, they are more likely to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.

*MODEL: Benefits Realization Management (BRM)

=== Portfolio Level ===

'''''Monitor Performance'''''

*MAIN IDEA: In any organization, performance monitoring is important to reduce social loafing, as it allows tracking both individual and team progress, identifying areas where improvement is needed and keeping employees accountable for their contributions. It can also help to identify areas where additional support or training may be needed, for example, if a team member is not performing as expected and is performing below their potential, it is possible to identify them early and provide the support needed to improve their performance by providing support rather than judgement. It can also help managers to recognize and reward high-performing employees, which can create a positive and competitive work environment. This can motivate employees to strive for excellence and thereby improve the company's performance.

*MODEL: Balanced Scorecard Model (BSC)

'''''Prioritization'''''

*MAIN IDEA: Within an organization, when employees are clear about their priorities, they are more likely to feel engaged and motivated, which can help reduce the likelihood of loafing. When prioritization is adopted as a strategy, employees can focus their time and energy on the most important tasks and avoid wasting time on less critical tasks. This can help reduce stress, create a better work environment, increase productivity and generally contribute to group synergy and better performance.

*MODEL: Project Portfolio Management (PPM)

= Limitations =

*MAIN IDEA: Social loafing is a phenomenon that normally occurs within the work group context and may not be visible to managers who do not proactively observe team performance. While it can be difficult to identify, its consequences are very noticeable and can generate huge losses at an organizational level, not only economically but also at a social level. As difficult as it is to identify, addressing it can be equally complex because when the strategy is implemented in a corrective rather than preventive way, the measures taken by managers can be negatively accepted by team members, causing a reverse-productive effect. Social loafing can be a symptom of larger organizational problems, such as poor communication, unclear expectations, or lack of motivation, which may require more significant changes to address. Among its limitations is the fact that most of the studies conducted have been done in physical, non-cognitive, and non-managerial contexts, so more accurate results on this phenomenon are lacking.

= Annotated Bibliography =

= References =
<references/>

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T20:23:20Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T20:17:37Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T20:11:21Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T20:05:47Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T15:11:13Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Application */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T11:30:54Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Big Idea */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T11:30:19Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Big Idea */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-10T11:01:31Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Big Idea */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-05-09T11:37:47Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Big Idea */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T13:14:48Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Project Level */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T13:11:43Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Limitations */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T13:08:10Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Limitations */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T12:35:42Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Application */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T12:29:10Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Application */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T12:26:34Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Application */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T12:16:14Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Portfolio Level */

Managerial Solutions for Social Loafing

2023-04-10T11:57:03Z

CarolinaValderrama: /* Program Level */