Steiner’s model of potential and actual productivity, faulty group…

The idea

Steiner compares what a group could achieve with what it does achieve. Potential productivity is the best result possible from members' combined resources and the demands of the task. Actual productivity is what the group really produces. Steiner argues that actual productivity equals potential productivity minus losses caused by faulty group processes. Losses arise when members do not combine effort well: social loafing, where an individual reduces effort because contribution is hard to identify; coordination problems, where timing, spacing or roles clash; and motivational faults such as disagreement or low cohesion. Example: four rowers with strong individual power have high potential productivity, but if one eases off and strokes are mistimed, actual productivity falls below it.

What earns the marks

• Potential productivity is the maximum output theoretically available from the group's combined resources and the task demands.
• Actual productivity is the real output the group achieves in performance.
• Steiner's relationship is actual productivity = potential productivity − losses from faulty group processes.
• Faulty group processes include social loafing, coordination breakdowns and motivational problems such as poor cohesion or conflict.
• Losses explain why a group of talented individuals can underperform compared with their combined individual capabilities.
• Reducing losses through clear roles, individual accountability and practised coordination raises actual productivity towards potential.

Common mistakes and how to put them right

• Thinking potential productivity is the same as actual productivity.

  Put it right: Potential is the theoretical best, while actual is what is really produced.

• Believing faulty group processes increase productivity.

  Put it right: They cause losses that reduce actual productivity below potential.

• Treating social loafing as a lack of ability.

  Put it right: It is reduced individual effort when personal contribution cannot be identified.

• Assuming a team of the best individual performers automatically has high actual productivity.

  Put it right: Coordination and motivation losses can still lower it.

Exam tips

• Learn the relationship as a formula in words so you can apply it to a named team sport scenario.
• When explaining a loss, name the faulty process and state how it lowers actual productivity.
• Use a short example, such as a relay team with mistimed changeovers, to show the difference between potential and actual productivity.