Socioemotional and Task Behavior

In problem-solving groups, individual members engage in different types of behavior, including task behavior, which focuses on the external problem to be addressed, and socioemotional behavior, which addresses the feelings that arise as a result of group interaction. This entry describes these two types of behavior and examines the leadership styles of group leaders who focus on each one.

Starting in 1947, social psychologist Robert F. Bales, at Harvard University, began studying roles in problem-solving groups. For the time, his methods were quite innovative. Small groups were observed through one-way mirrors, and all behavior was recorded. The observed groups were composed of five male Harvard undergraduates. They were given a human relations case and were told to discuss it for about 40 minutes and then dictate a recommended solution into a tape recording at the end of their session. After some refinement, Bales devised a set of 12 behavior categories that trained judges could code while observing ongoing interaction. Generally, 15 to 20 acts were coded every minute.

The 12 categories of behavior included some that were directly relevant to solving the problem the group was asked to address. Three of these are gives suggestion, gives information, and asks for opinion. Other categories refer to emotional expression related to interpersonal interaction for example, shows tension release, shows antagonism, and shows solidarity. Overall, 56% of the coded behaviors were considered problem-solving attempts, and 44% included reactions to those attempts. In general, a task-related initiative would produce both a task-related response and some emotional response. For example, one person might offer a suggestion, a second might give an opinion about that suggestion, and a third might express annoyance, causing the first person to look embarrassed.

One overall conclusion from these and related studies is that when groups work on problems, two kinds of issues come into focus those related to the challenge of solving the problem confronting the group and those that involve addressing and managing the feelings that the interaction produces. Such emotions are almost always apt to be a feature of group interaction directed toward solving a problem, especially if the problem is ambiguous or difficult. Thus some behavior has to be directed toward the task, and some toward relationships and emotions.

A second conclusion from such studies is that while each person engages in behavior related to both challenges, some people focus more on the task, others focus more on feelings, and some are quite balanced. Whether any individual at any instant, or over time, focuses more on the external task or more on emotions within the group will depend on two things. First, what are the individual's own inclinations? What role or roles is he or she most comfortable performing? Second, how do others in the group behave? That is, any individual's behavior is shaped by his or her own personality and by the behavior of others. As pioneering psychologist Kurt Lewin observed many years ago, behavior is a function of the person and the environment.

Regardless of the cause, some individuals in groups become task specialists and others become what Bales called socioemotional specialists. This development has implications for leadership. Is the leader likely to be one of these specialists or instead a person who can deal effectively with both the challenges of the group's task and the dynamics arising from the group's feelings? An initial hypothesis was that there would be a status order in which the person who contributed most to problem solving would also be the best liked. This hypothesis was not supported. Neither the person who was most active nor the person who was rated as having the best ideas was typically the best liked. Instead, it was found that there seemed to be two leaders in many groups, one who was regarded as the task leader and one who seemed to be the socioemotional leader. This finding suggested the hypothesis of two complementary leaders, one focusing on the task and the other on emotions and relationships. This hypothesis included the idea that the two leaders might get along quite well, their complementary skills combining to promote both group success and group happiness. The idea that leadership involves these two roles is supported by research published by Ralph Stogdill in 1948. Stogdill found that two categories of leader behavior are initiating structure and showing consideration.

...