
Tug of War between sailors and Marines in Vera Cruz, ca. 1910-1915. The earliest known study of social loafing is research by Max Ringelmann, published in 1913 ("Recherches sur les moteurs animés: Travail de l'homme", in Annales de l'Institut National Agronomique, 2nd series, vol. 12, pages 1-40.) The experiments he performed involved rope pulling, as in a tug of war. What became known as the Ringelmann Effect is the phenomenon in which individual members' efforts decline steadily as group size increases.
The photo is by the Bain News Service, from the George Grantham Bain Collection of the U.S. Library of Congress.
Holding back — choosing to restrain one's own efforts toward group goals — is one of the many causes of disappointing team performance. It occurs when one or more team members exert less effort toward achieving a team objective than they would have exerted in analogous situations, if working as individuals. In team-oriented workplaces, where holding back can create significant budget and schedule issues, understanding the causes of voluntary restraint of effort and learning how to control it can be steps on the path to superior organizational and personal performance.
The literature of group performance includes studies of many forms of holding back. Their definitions vary, and some authors distinguish among them on the basis of differences in motivation-related causes. Here's Part I of a catalog of forms of holding back. These first three are among the more thoroughly researched.
- Social loafing
- Social loafing happens when a group member exerts less effort toward a shared objective than he or she would have exerted working alone. In some virtual environments, it assumes a form known as tele-shirking.
- Although the conventional definition makes no distinctions with respect to motive, the first investigations of social loafing related to efforts in which all contributions to achieving the shared objective were similar in kind. That is, one could not easily determine by observation which team members were engaged in social loafing. In some cases of social loafing, one cannot even determine whether it has occurred, other than by examining the aggregate effort. These conditions distinguish social loafing from free riding and the sucker effect, described below.
- Free riding
- Free riding is holding back because of the belief that others will compensate for the effort withheld.
- Some have defined free riding to require that the free rider receive some kind of benefit while exerting zero effort. But the essential element of this form of holding back is the perception on the part of the free rider that the efforts of others will compensate for the free rider's choice to withhold effort.
- The sucker effect
- Another form Choosing to restrain one's own
efforts toward group goals is
one of the many causes of
disappointing team performanceof holding back, known as the sucker effect, occurs when group members perceive — accurately or not — that other members are holding back, for whatever reason. To avoid being seen (and possibly seeing themselves) as "suckers," they reduce their own effort to a point at which they feel sufficiently less likely to seem to have been exploited. The sucker effect might also have anticipatory forms in which a team member curtails efforts because of a belief that another team member is likely to withhold, even when there is no objective evidence of any current withholding. - Here the identification of those who hold back is essential — it is the central reason for withholding effort.
We'll continue next time, examining some less-well-studied mechanisms of holding back. Next issue in this series
Top
Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and
found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Workplace Politics:
More Limitations of the Eisenhower Matrix
- The Eisenhower Matrix is useful for distinguishing which tasks deserve attention and in what order.
It helps us by removing perceptual distortion about what matters most. But it can't help as much with
some kinds of perceptual distortion.
Impasses in Group Decision Making: III
- In group decision making, impasses can develop. Some are related to the substance of the issue at hand.
With some effort, we can usually resolve substantive impasses. But treating nonsubstantive impasses
in the same way doesn't work. Here's why.
When the Answer Isn't the Point: II
- Sometimes, when we ask questions, we're more interested in eliciting behavior from the person questioned,
rather than answers. Here's Part II of a set of techniques questioners use when the answer to the question
wasn't the point of asking.
Stone-Throwers at Meetings: II
- A stone-thrower in a meeting is someone who is determined to halt forward progress. Motives vary, from
embarrassing the chair to holding the meeting hostage in exchange for advancing an agenda. What can
chairs do about stone-throwers?
Surviving Incompetence: II
- When your organization undertakes a misguided effort that will certainly fail, you have options. One
is to head for the exit. To search for a new position in such circumstances requires some care. Example:
an internal transfer might not really be an exit.
See also Workplace Politics for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming June 25: Meandering Monologues in Meetings: Engagement
- In a meeting, a meandering monologue has taken over when someone speaks at length with no sign of coming to a clear point, and little of evident value. This behavior reduces engagement on the part of other attendees, thereby limiting the meeting's value to the organization. Available here and by RSS on June 25.
And on July 2: The True Costs of Contractors
- Among the more commonly cited reasons for hiring contractors instead of direct employees is cost savings. But are these savings real? Direct compensation, including perks and benefits, might favor the contractor arrangement, but indirect costs tell another story. Available here and by RSS on July 2.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenaXXxGCwVgbgLZDuRner@ChacDjdMAATPdDNJnrSwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed


Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.
- Wikipedia has a nice article with a list of additional resources
- Some public libraries offer collections. Here's an example from Saskatoon.
- Check my own links collection
- LinkedIn's Office Politics discussion group