arrow4 Comments
  1. […] divides up into smaller groups of max 7 people (5 being the suggested optimum - Hackman) to limit the number of the social […]

  2. Occupational Psychology
    Jan 02 - 7:39 am

    It’s an awesome post in favor of all the web visitors;
    they will obtain benefit from it I am sure.

  3. Pawel Brodzinski
    Jan 23 - 6:11 am

    Hi Sheila,

    Interestingly enough Anita Woolley in her research also mentions that collective intelligence grows as a team size increases and it flattens out between 10 and 11 people. It means that from a perspective of solving complex problems or accomplishing complex tasks the additional power we get by adding further team members compensates for the cost of more communication path and social interactions. It goes way beyond 5 people.

    I often ask people during my presentations about an opinion whether individual intelligence and collective intelligence are connected. I always get vast majority of answers pointing that there is such connection, a discussion is only how strong it is. As you surely know the research didn’t prove it to be true. This is, by the way, a challenge of research based on opinions–the conclusions should be drawn very carefully.

    By the way an interesting area to focus on would be what happens in big teams, e.g. bigger than 10 people. From my experience the team dynamics changes a lot. People tend to create sub-​​groups but often these sub-​​groups are created and disbanded dynamically depending on a situation. This at least partially addresses the challenge of too many social interactions and communication complexity. In other words at the same time a person can operate in a small group and a bigger entity. What would be the team size exactly in such a case?

  4. […] the number of participants in a meeting to as few people as possible since there’s convincing research that the best size for a decision-​​making team is an odd number close to […]

Leave a Reply

Mobile Theme