No surprise to many of us… research has now shown that you need to be a lot more positive than negative on teams.
10:1 – Ideal Positive:Negative Balance
Using a “Capture Lab” researchers saw a strong average correlation between positive language and performance.
- Low performing teams communicated 1 positive for every 3 negatives – 1:3
- Medium teams averaged 2:1
- High performing teams ranged from 6:1 to 11:1
- Too much positive, 12:1 or more, “calcifies a team”, making necessary change and adaptation difficult.
Sustainable marriages apparently need at least 5 times as many positive emotions regarding one’s partner as negative–5:1
This ratio is yet another reason to use positive change approaches such as Appreciative Inquiry, Positive Psychology, building on your strengths, Solutions Focus, and Positive Deviance.
BTW, I make no money off these links, but I do make money using these methods in our positive change consulting. We find these approaches not only more effective for our clients, but far more enjoyable for them… and for us!
Tagged: appreciative inquiry, influence, motivation, positive, Purpose, solutions focus
Thanks Bob. Good to know these facts. Always interesting to read what you write. Will Phelps did some research on the effect of the bad apple in groups and found that bad has a stronger impact than good (I believe his study was the root of the 5:1 positive to negative ratio you mentioned). He found that the negative behaviors of laziness, destructive/sarcastic comments and the like carried 5X the wollup of positive interactions. Hence 5 make up behaviors to 1 bad one. BTW, This American Life had him on not that long ago. I think the theme for that podcast was “Bad Apples.”
Note: Although the assertion that a higher positive ratio correlates with higher performance is still sound… There has been some challenges to the mathematical tools used in the original research.
I still believe aiming for 10:1 is a helpful guide. As the science and math around this improves I may have to revise the actual numbers involved.
Either way, strive for a healthy balance of positive topics and exchanges to “facing the hard truth” negative topics and exchanges.
Can you be more specific about the content of your article? After reading it, I still have some doubts. Hope you can help me.