Presentation on theme: "5 Cohesion and Development"— Presentation transcript:
1 5 Cohesion and Development A group is not just a set of individuals, but a cohesive whole that joins the members in interlocking interdepen-dencies. This solidarity or unity is called group cohesion and is a necessary, if not sufficient, condition for a group to exist. A group may begin as a collection of strangers, but, as uncertainty gives way to increasing unity, the members become bound to their group and its goals. As cohesion and commitment ebb and flow with time, the group’s influence over its members rises and falls.What is group cohesion, and what are its sources?How does cohesion develop over time?What are the positive and negative consequences of cohesion?Do initiations increase cohesion?
2 Cohesion & Development Explaining Initiations The Nature of CohesionSourcesSocialTaskCollectiveEmotionalStructuralDeveloping CohesionTheories of developmentFive StagesCycles of developmentConsequencesof CohesionSatisfaction and adjustmentDynamics and influenceProductivityExplaining InitiationsCohesion and initiationsHazing
3 The solidarity, unity, integrity of a group Sources “The total field of forces which act on members to remain in the group”The Nature of CohesionFestinger, Schachter, & Back, 1950, p. 164SourcesOriginFrom the Latin “haesus,” which means “cling to” (e.g., adhesive, inherit)DefinitionThe solidarity, unity, integrity of a groupSourcesA group’s cohesiveness derives on a number of sources, such as attraction, commitment to a task, and so on.SocialTaskCollectiveEmotionalStructuralEquifinality: Potential to reach an end state through many pathsMultifinality: Reaching different endings from the same starting conditions
4 Multicomponent-multilevel model Sources of CohesionMulticomponent-multilevel modelMultipleComponentsMultipleLevels(e.g., attraction, shared task focus, identity…(e.g., member to member, member to group…)
5 Components Levels Social Cohesion Sources of Cohesion Social Cohesion Task CohesionCollective CohesionEmotional CohesionStructural CohesionAttractionbetweenmembersAttractionto thegroup-as-a-whole
6 Shared commitment to group goals Task CohesionSources of CohesionComponentsProcessesSocial CohesionTask CohesionCollective CohesionEmotional CohesionStructural CohesionShared commitment to group goalsCollective efficacyGroup potency
7 Components Collective Cohesion Sources of Cohesion Social Cohesion Task CohesionCollective CohesionEmotional CohesionStructural CohesionGroup Unity: WEBelonging (part of the group): INSelf-group bondingIdentity fusion
8 Components Emotional Cohesion Sources of Cohesion Social Cohesion Task CohesionCollective CohesionEmotional CohesionStructural CohesionMoraleEsprit de corpsRelational cohesion theory: cohesion increases as the group becomes a source of positive emotions (e.g., behavioral syncrony)
9 Components Processes Structural Cohesion Sources of Cohesion Social CohesionTask CohesionCollective CohesionEmotional CohesionStructural CohesionOpen groups tend to be less cohesive than closed ones (e.g., e-groups)
12 Explaining Initiations The Nature of CohesionSourcesSocialTaskCollectiveEmotionalStructuralConsequencesof CohesionExplaining InitiationsDeveloping CohesionTheories of developmentFive StagesCycles of developmentBasic IdeaGroups develop: over time they exhibit predictable patterns of changeStage ModelsSome models assume groups move through a series of separable stages as they developCycle ModelsSome models assume groups repeatedly cycle through periods or phases during their lifetimes
13 Performance Stabilizing Formation Conflict Five Stage Model of Group DevelopmentPerformancemonitoring, leading, feedbackStabilizingstructure and stabilityFormationPerformance and cohesioncreating the group and setting goalsdealing with source of tensionConflictTime
14 Stage Tuckman’s Five Stage Model Major Processes Characteristics Orientation:FormingMembers become familiar with each other and group; dependency and inclusion issues; acceptance of leader and group consensusCommunications are tentative, polite; concern for ambiguity, group’s goals; leader is active; members are compliantConflict:StormingDisagreement over procedures; dissatisfaction and tension; antagonism toward leaderCriticism of ideas; poor attendance; hostility; coalition formationStructure:NormingGrowth of cohesiveness and unity; roles, standards, and relationships; increased trust, communicationAgreement on procedures; reduction in role ambiguity; increased “we-feeling”Work:PerformingGoal achievement; performance and productionDecision making; problem solving; mutual cooperationDissolution:AdjourningTermination of roles; completion of tasks; reduction of dependencyDisintegration and withdrawal; increased independence and emotionality; regret
15 Cyclical vs. Stage Models Tuckman: A successive stage modelBale’s Equilibrium model: a cyclical modelPunctuated equilibrium modelTask OrientationRelationship OrientationCultural differences in development and time perceptions: polychronic vs. monochronic
16 Explaining Initiations The Nature of CohesionDeveloping CohesionConsequencesof CohesionSatisfaction and adjustmentDynamics and influenceProductivityExplaining InitiationsMost people, if asked to choose between two groups—one that is cohesive and another that is not—would likely pick the cohesive group. But cohesiveness has its drawbacks. A cohesive group is an intense group, and this intensity affects the members, the group’s dynamics, and the group’s performance in both positive and negative ways. Cohesion leads to a range of consequences—not all of them desirable.
17 Explaining Initiations Satisfaction and adjustmentExplaining InitiationsDonald Roy’s (1959) “banana time” case study documented the benefits of membership in a cohesive workgroup. Roy worked for two months in 12-hour shifts lasting from 8AM to 8:30PM with three other men in an isolated room in a factory. The work was tedious, menial, repetitive, and tiring, but the cohesive workgroup group filled its workday with jokes, teasing, kidding around, and horseplay that gave structure and meaning to their day. To break up the day into smaller segments, the men stopped from time to time for various refreshments and breaks. There was, of course, lunchtime, but the men added many others, such as coffee time, peach time, fish time, and banana time. These rituals and social activities, collectively called “banana time” by Roy, turned a bad job into a good one.
18 Problematic Consequences Positive Consequences Satisfaction and adjustmentDynamics and influenceProblematic ConsequencesPositive ConsequencesEnhanced member satisfactionReduced tension, stressHigher group engagementReduced turnoverLonger duration of membershipIntensification of emotional and social processesIncreased influence, pressureHostilityGroupthinkWhat about productivity?
19 Do Cohesive Groups Outperform Less Cohesive Groups? Sources: Mullen & Copper, 1994; Beal et al., 2003; Gully et al., 1995.51Social cohesion.17.,17Cohesion.25Unity(Group Pride)Performance.24.24.25Task Cohesion (teamwork)Task InterdependenceNorms are also critically important
20 Studies suggest that the productivity of cohesive groups depends on the norms of that group: if the group norms do not support hard work, then cohesive groups will be strikingly unproductive!Groups with norms that stress productivityP r o d u c t i v i t yGroups with norms that stress low productivityLow CohesionHigh Cohesion
21 Explaining Initiations Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance predicts that people who must invest in their group will become committed to it.Festinger, Schachter’s and Back’s classic study of the “Seekers” supported this predictionsApplication:Explaining InitiationsCohesion and initiationsHazingAronson & Mills tested this hypothesis in an experimental study of initiation and also found evidence of increased commitment
22 Explaining Initiations Application:Explaining InitiationsCohesion and initiationsHazingAronson & Mills tested this hypothesis in an experimental study of initiation and also found evidence of increased commitment
23 What sustains hazing? Dangers of hazing Hazing Bonding: Increases dependency on the groupDominance: Establishes hierarchy, statusCommitment: Increases psychological costs and commitmentTradition: Defended as a sacred traditionIneffective: Not as effective a means of increasing commitment as other group- level activitiesDangerous: Harmful and fatal in some casesIllegal: Banded in most jurisdictions
24 Cohesion & Development Explaining Initiations The Nature of CohesionSourcesSocialTaskCollectiveEmotionalStructuralDeveloping CohesionTheories of developmentFive StagesCycles of developmentConsequencesof CohesionSatisfaction and adjustmentDynamics and influenceProductivityExplaining InitiationsCohesion and initiationsHazing
25 Group Development Tuckman’s 5 stage model of group developlment PerformingGroup DevelopmentTuckman’s 5 stage model of group developlmentFormingStormingNormingPerformingAdjourningTaskNormingStormingAdjourningFormingSource: Forsyth, 2010
26 For images of the 1980 US Hockey team s see Sports_Illustrated_Miracle_on_Ice_cover.jpg