In addition to self-efficacy, efficacy perceptions of others within a task environment influence task performance. I define such efficacy perceptions of single others as transpersonal efficacy and investigate it in five studies. The first shows transpersonal efficacy can drive performance. The second then investigates how self and transpersonal efficacy jointly influence task performance. Further, the role of the focal other within the task environment, as an outcome interdependent or non-interdependent partner, or as an opponent, is shown to moderate these relationships. Then, transpersonal efficacy is investigated in intact groups. Groups are omnipresent in modern organizations. However, deficiencies in the amount of effort members exert in group tasks, and the manner in which they exert that effort, prevent groups from optimizing the talent of their members. I draw on social cognit ive theory to predict that the pattern of mult iple interact ing efficacy perceptions within a group environment regulate both the level and direct ion of within-group effort allocat ion. Further, I use expectancy theory to predict task interdependence as a moderator of whether these perceptions produce efficient effort allocat ions. Support for these proposit ions is found in two field studies invo lving basketball and project teams. Finally, instrumentality is investigated as a driver of within-group information exchange. Groups rarely utilize the unique knowledge of their members when making decisio ns. This tendency to neglect the expertise of group members severely limit s the effect iveness o f group decisio n making. The final study uses expectancy theory to investigate this issue, and to link motivat ion to informat ion exchange in groups. Results indicate that expectancy mot ivat ion drives groups to utilize expertise awareness, exchange more unique informat ion, and thus so lve a hidden profile problem correctly. The results of all five studies are discussed in terms of the applicabilit y of transpersonal efficacy to predicting individual behavior within and outside o f group contexts. In addition, they are discussed in terms of the usefulness of viewing groups as collections of reciprocally interacting entities, as opposed to singular entities or collections of individuals.