Group Cohesion: The Relationship Between Cohesion And Performance

Although most people know this, the truth is that the functioning of a group is based on the distribution and configuration of some elements, such as roles, norms and group cohesion. All these elements act like a “glue” that turns ordinary people into a group. Many elements characterize the structure of a group, such as:

• order
• hierarchical division
• influence
• prestige
• differentiation

That way people can come together and call themselves a group. However, that alone doesn’t make it a group per se. Groups require a shared identity, structure and interdependence. Based on these variables, it is safe to say that group cohesion is different.

Cohesion works like glue

Therefore, cohesion is the “glue” of a group. Now different types of cohesion can manifest themselves in a group. Let’s see what these are.

• Cohesion through personal attraction. This cohesion is based on interdependence, which we can define as the force that holds the members of the group together. It is a result of the shared interests and mutual interests of the group members. This association can occur between school friends.
• Cohesion towards objectives. The basis of this kind of cohesion is the will to stay in a group because it facilitates the achievement of goals. Usually the group members think that it is too difficult to achieve their goals outside the group. Therefore, they stay in the group as long as there are certain tasks and interests. This coherence can exist, for example, in the work environment.
• Cohesion per group attraction. In other groups, cohesion may be based on how interesting or attractive the group’s activities are. In this case, the familiarity within the group or the goals it can achieve doesn’t really matter. Cohesion exists because people love the organization and the work that the group does. This is why group members choose to stay. This coherence can manifest itself in companies that not only appeal to us on personal goals or objectives, but also, for example, in non-profit organizations.

The Paradigms of Group Cohesion

The world is a very globalized place with big companies being developed in the blink of an eye. However, sometimes people don’t see important elements of individual and group psychology, in favor of greater benefits.

A company’s managers seek the best possible performance from their employees, but sometimes they do it through the use of unnecessary tools or in scenarios that don’t work. In a sense, they are not done refining or integrating the elements that need improvement. This could be the case for group cohesion.

Hurry and poor organization can help a conglomerate of people work together to get the best results.

While incentives can be offered to make it that way, it seems a sensible solution to study the relationship between group cohesion and performance to know whether this independent variable would alter the dependent.

Therefore, we will talk about group cohesion based on interdependence, shared identity and structure. Some paradigms form the idea of ​​group cohesion, explaining it through experimentation.

These experiments helped researchers conclude that cohesion is very relevant when it comes to predicting people’s behavior and performance.

The minimal group paradigm: shared identity

In the minimal group paradigm (Tajfel et al.), the researchers posed the following question: What is the minimum requirement for a group of isolated individuals to be considered a group?

The people were divided into two groups: the Klee group and the Kandinsky group, without even knowing each other. Through this experiment, the researchers wanted to see whether each individual would enhance and favor their social identity within the group despite not knowing others in the group.

The answer was yes. 77% of people chose the option that suited their group over the others. Fifteen percent traded with equity. However, they noted that the general tendency was to systematically please everyone in the group, regardless of whether one individual was harmed.

Through the minimal group paradigm, we can explain cohesion on the basis of a social category. In this sense, the fact that different people can become real group members seems to be enough of a distinctive element for a group to come together.

Social Identity Theory: Self-Concept as Regulator

Tajfel again studies group cohesion by analyzing self-concept, an important variable in personal psychology. Basically, the self-concept refers to the image that each individual has of himself. Now there are two important aspects to consider in the self-concept, namely:

• Personal identity. This is part of the self-concept that arises from meanings and emotions, as well as from personal emotional experience and from the most intimate aspects of the person.
• Social identity. This is related to the self-concept that arises from belonging to social groups, associated with the value and emotional meaning attached to it. Believe it or not, some aspects of the image people have of themselves come from their position in certain social groups.

To truly belong to a group, it is important to know yourself first. Moreover, each member’s search for positive aspects of his identity is something that defines group membership. Some aspects of the group can be beneficial to some of its members and harmful to others.

From this theory, group cohesion arises from the need to maintain self-concept. Those who join a group are looking to nurture their self-concept in a positive way.

The relationship between group cohesion and performance

From the studies and experiments conducted by social psychology, while knowing the reason for group cohesion in certain groups, we have come to some conclusions about the relationship between cohesion and group performance.

According to the needs model, group cohesion is not earlier than the performance in the work of the group. Actually, it seems to work the other way around. Performance is beneficial for cohesion. If a political party wins the elections in a country, the cohesion in that group is likely to increase as a result of the good results.

Is there a relationship between the two?

The data points to the following conclusions:

• There is an important link between cohesion and performance or productivity.
• Such relationships mainly occur in natural or small groups.
• The groups that require a high degree of interaction to carry out their actions effectively are not the ones that show a greater relationship between cohesion and execution.
• Task engagement is the element that best explains the relationship between cohesion and productivity.

• Interpersonal attraction and group attraction play a secondary role.
• The direction of the effect is greater from performance to cohesion than vice versa, as we explained above.

Group cohesion is the basis of group phenomena, such as:

• Interaction
• standards
• Busy
• conformity
• group identity
• groupthink
• performance
• power
• leadership

The greater the cohesion, the greater the pressure or influence of the group on its members, both on social-emotional aspects and those related to the tasks.

On the other hand, the attraction that leads to cohesion and thus the ability to exert influence can be an attraction fueled by the personal characteristics of the members and the goals of the group.