The Thames College of Professional studies published an interesting paper on ‘The Nature and Significance of Groups in Organisations’. I’d like to credit the author and link to the original article but have been unable to find it. Please let me know if you can help.
The author discusses the attribute of cohesiveness. Here at Eventus we find that cohesiveness is frequently an objective of organisers of team building events. An interesting point made by the author is that a high level of cohesiveness in a team can be both a positive and a negative attribute, and outlines the influence it has on performance. The author also links ideas of cohesiveness to the classic stages of team development (forming, storming, norming…). It’s an interesting read:
Cohesiveness within groups can also be called esprit de corps (spirit of cooperation or team spirit). Cohesiveness is characterised by the closeness the team experiences during its lifetime: the longer the team is together, the stronger the feeling of cohesiveness. Cohesiveness can also be characterised by the norms or belief systems that the group develops during its life cycle. This ‘togetherness’ causes the group to close ranks, should it be threatened by outside interference or individuals trying to undermine it existence and objectives. Group cohesiveness is a gift that is reserved for established groups. Newly formed groups are not party to this gift, as they are very much in the forming, storming and norming stages. Individuals are in the process of getting to know each other, their objectives and their reasons for existence.
In 1996, Cole identified a series of factors that can impact on a group’s cohesiveness:
- The motivation and desire of the individuals involved to work together.
- The size of the group
- Whether incentives are offered for tasks well done or completed to schedule
- Infiltration by individuals from other groups and/or the threat of competition from formal groups.
- Whether individuals have something in common with each other, such as gender, qualifications, experience etc.
- Whether the leader is weak or strong, consultative or authoritarian.
- A high degree of group cohesion is not necessarily a good thing for the organisation. There are potential problems with it as well as benefits.
Members of relatively cohesive groups tend to work better with and support each other. This particularly in relation to the degree of interaction and involvement, promotes identification with the group and increases satisfaction. Thus, to this extent, cohesion can be seen as positive.
On the other hand, highly cohesive groups can be very protective of themselves and their interests. This can make them relatively closed (restricting opportunities to join) and difficult to deal with by outsiders. Where cooperation is required, there can be problems with openness and sharing information where a potential threat is perceived, and an insensitivity to the needs of others, such as using no shared jargon.
The extent of group cohesion can also affect performance levels, although not necessarily in the way in which you might think. Whilst cohesive groups tend to be more effective there is no guarantee that their effectiveness will be in relation to the goals of the organisation. What can be said is that members of cohesive groups tend to perform to a similar level and standard, conforming to the established group norms, whereas less cohesive groups are likely to have a wider range of individual performance levels and standards. The effectiveness of the level and standard of performance in terms of organisation’s goals will depend on the extent to which the group’s performance norms support those goals.
Therefore, a highly cohesive group that has low norms about performance will ensure that a generally low level of performance is produced by all its members. Finally, the degree of group cohesion can affect the ability of the organisation to instigate change. Again this may be positive or negative. Where a highly cohesive group supports change in general or a particular innovation or development, it will be relatively easy to introduce the change. On the other hand, if there is opposition from such a group, this can be a substantial block to new developments.
You may also be interested in reading our post about the Stages of Team Development
If you want to develop your team, take a look at our training and development events – intelligent team building