Seeking the comparative advantage: The dynamics of individual cooperation in single vs. multiple-team environments

Social dilemma studies predict that people will withhold cooperation from their teammates. Small group studies show that competition between teams increases cooperation among teammates. In this study, the two theories are integrated to show how performance comparisons with members of another team increase or decrease cooperation in an intra-team social dilemma. 111 MBA and undergraduate students participated in a laboratory experiment that finds that comparison of performance across competitive teams generates cooperation when the comparison is favorable. A computer simulation identifies decisions processes, finding partial support for comparative information across teams acting to reinforce cooperation. It also indicates that personal consistency accounts for parts of the decision process. These processes operate in the form of a rule called Win-Stay/Lose-Revert.

[1]  A. Rapoport,et al.  Provision of step-level public goods: Effects of greed and fear of being gypped , 1989 .

[2]  M. Markus,et al.  Information technology and organizational change: causal structure in theory and research , 1988 .

[3]  G. Hardin,et al.  The Tragedy of the Commons , 1968, Green Planet Blues.

[4]  John Orbell,et al.  Organizing Groups for Collective Action , 1986, American Political Science Review.

[5]  Ralf Schwarzer,et al.  Self-related cognitions in anxiety and motivation , 1986 .

[6]  David M. Messick,et al.  Individual Heuristics and the Dynamics of Cooperation in Large Groups. , 1995 .

[7]  John H. Holland,et al.  Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[8]  S. Komorita,et al.  Interpersonal Relations: Mixed-Motive Interaction , 1995 .

[9]  J. S. Adams,et al.  Inequity In Social Exchange , 1965 .

[10]  M. Nowak,et al.  A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner's Dilemma game , 1993, Nature.

[11]  R. A. Cosier,et al.  Equity Theory and Time: A Reformulation , 1983 .

[12]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge , 1972 .

[13]  V. Derlega,et al.  Cooperation and Helping Behavior: Theories and Research , 1982 .

[14]  HUGH ROBERT MILL.  The Temperature of the Clyde Sea-Area , 1887, Nature.

[15]  W. Hamilton,et al.  The Evolution of Cooperation , 1984 .

[16]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  Intra-and Interorganizational Cooperation : Toward a Research Agenda , 2007 .

[17]  Edward E. Lawler,et al.  Strategic Pay: Aligning Organizational Strategies and Pay Systems. , 1991 .

[18]  Michael Smithson,et al.  Resolving Social Dilemmas : Dynamic, Structural, and Intergroup Aspects , 1999 .

[19]  Ido Erev,et al.  Constructive Intergroup Competition as a Solution to the Free Rider Problem: A Field Experiment , 1993 .

[20]  A. Rapoport,et al.  Prisoner's Dilemma , 1965 .

[21]  Robert R. Blake,et al.  Managing intergroup conflict in industry , 1964 .

[22]  Gary Bornstein,et al.  Cooperation in Intergroup and Single-Group Social Dilemmas , 1994 .

[23]  Ido Erev,et al.  Intergroup competition as a structural solution to social dilemmas. , 1990 .

[24]  Lawrence B. Mohr,et al.  Explaining organizational behavior , 1982 .

[25]  E. Hilgard,et al.  Theories of Learning , 1981 .

[26]  M. Lichbach.  The Rebel's Dilemma , 1995 .

[27]  K. Popper,et al.  Conjectures and refutations;: The growth of scientific knowledge , 1972 .

[28]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  SCRIPTS, PLANS, GOALS, AND UNDERSTANDING , 1988 .

[29]  J. M. Rabbie.  Chapter 6 – The Effects of Intergroup Competition and Cooperation on Intragroup and Intergroup Relationships , 1982 .