The Effectiveness of Third-Party Process Consultation as a Function of the Consultant's Prestige and Style of Intervention

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The present study examines the effects of process consultation on group performance and group cohesiveness. Two factors were studied: (a) the consultant's prestige (high vs. low) and (b) the style of intervention (instrumental process analysis vs. interpersonal process analysis). The results of the study are summarized as follows: 1. Task groups using process analysis, with or without a consultant, improved more in their work processes and cohesiveness than task groups which did not use process analysis. 2. Groups which were facilitated by a third party were not significantly different from groups which performed process analysis on their own. 3. There were no differences due to the prestige of the consultant. 4. Instrumental process analysis was followed by greater improvements in work process and performance than was interpersonal process analysis. There were no differences in cohesiveness as a consequence of the two styles of intervention. 5. The interaction between prestige and styles of intervention did not follow any consistent pattern. The results of this study are consistent with a "specificity proposition" stating that an intervention is more likely to succeed in those areas on which it is focused. Implications of this proposition for organization development are discussed in some detail.

This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit: