Group Cohesiveness

The topic of last week’s discussion was groups, with an emphasis on cohesion. How does group cohesion enable an organization to function at their best? In 1980, the U.S. Olympic hockey team had a goal: to obtain a bronze, silver or gold medal. However, they needed to beat the U.S.S.R. National Championship Team, a team from Russia that was to be contended with. They were underdogs, mainly comprised of college students who lacked much experience, and yet were able to defeat Russia. How did they accomplish this? Luckily for them, they had a bond that gave them focus and determination. The cohesion of the group was a force that kept them intact by pushing the members together. Cohesion is considered to be a form of attraction. Attraction can be measured by the number and strength of mutual positive attitudes among the members of the group. Attraction can influence performance at two levels: individual and group levels. In the case of the U.S. hockey team, there was individual attraction since they had to do everything together. This in turn led to each member feeling positively about the group as a whole. Cohesion is the integrity, fellowship and sense of community within the group. Each member should feel that they belong in their group. This can result in enthusiasm and commitment that can be unprecedented. Cohesion can also be considered a type of teamwork. Groups in the military are driven by their shared desires. A group whose cohesiveness stems from their commitment to achieving shared desires is called collective efficacy. Unlike being optimistic and having confidence in the group, this type of cohesion is fueled by shared beliefs that the group can attain their desired goals. It is having faith in the group. It is having a positive regard for the team’s potential. Esprit de corps can also have an effect on the group. Another term for it is positive affective tone. This can have a variety of positive outcomes. The combination of the unity, sense of belonging and shared goals of the teammates of the U.S. hockey team allowed them to beat their opponent. They were, without a doubt, a cohesive group. We then talked about Tuckman’s Model of Group Development. This model consists of: Forming, Storming, Norming and Performing. In forming, the group gets together and gets to know one another. This can be considered the “honeymoon” stage. Storming, as the term implies, is when the group hits conflict. Norming is when the group resolves the conflict and creates routines. Performing is when the group reaches a kind of synergy and performs at pace that goes beyond their routine. This concept does apply to my life right now. My roommate and I have experienced a couple of these facets. In the beginning, everything was fine and dandy. We have definitely had conflicts, but we were able to achieve resolution by going through the norming phase. We each figured out what the other person required to live in a comfortable environment. It has made a relationship considerably better.