Power disparity on a team: When it is beneficial and when it is not
Power disparity on teams refers to when power is not equally distributed amongst team members. Years of research have not determined whether it is good or bad for performance. From one perspective, when power is concentrated in a single person or very few, there is more structure, order, and role clarity, which can lead to increased performance. However, from another perspective, concentration of power can lead to politics and competition. Team members may be less likely to share, help, and learn together, which can worsen performance. A recent study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology entitled When Does Power Disparity Help or Hurt Group Performance? attempted to answer the question of whether power disparity is positive or negative, and in what situations it is positive or negative.
The researchers found that power disparity can be both good and bad, depending on the situation. The key factor is competence–how well an individual can use their expertise to succeed at a task. When the individual on the team who has the most power is also the most competent, power disparity will lead to increased performance. In contrast, when the individual on the team who has the most power is not the most competent, the team’s performance will suffer. The person with the least competence will lead the team down the wrong direction. The most competent team members may be marginalized and ignored.
The researchers had three recommendations based on their findings:
- Coordinate work to ensure that power is given to the most competent person on the team.
- Assign power to those with the greatest expertise and competence on a given task. In other words, the most competent person may not be the same for all projects. Adjust accordingly.
- If teams are unable to grant power to the most competent, the team should be arranged with low power-disparity.