Vecchio (2006 p 215) states that generally people who are physically closer to each other develop closer relationships than those who are further away. He adds that the principle of proximity is not only valid for work environments but also in the relationship between neighbors. Cohesion can be described as a characteristic of teamwork. Group cohesion is defined as “the relationship of individual group members to the group as a whole” (Schmuck & Schmuck, 2000).

A survey conducted by Moshe and Maymon (1998) among high school students found that observers rated a team’s cohesiveness as high (37.8%) when all members of the group cooperated to make their group successful in competition with others. other groups. A Gallup study of 400 companies concluded that “the ability to make better friends in the workplace is among the twelve most reliable predictors of a productive workplace” (Vecchio, 2006 p 219).

Research by Stanley (1977, p. 69) suggests that the positive finding in the case of actual productivity substantially confirms the prediction that high cohesion is associated with high between-group variability in performance standards. Vecchio (2006, p. 226) defines four categories of “group cohesion effects”: 1) satisfaction 2) communication 3) hostility 4) productivity. Although hostility may be prevalent in highly cohesive groups, such acts are directed toward nonmembers of the group.

Professor Losh (2001) explains that highly cohesive groups can enforce group norms, whatever they may be, much more effectively than less cohesive groups. The pressures to conform (internal pressures) are greater. Because people value their membership in cohesive groups, they are willing to conform their behavior to group norms. Even if there is an initial “storm” and conflict, if the group “solidifies,” a period of “norms” follows and members settle. However, external pressures are also greater. Cohesive groups put more pressure on deviants to conform to group norms than less cohesive groups.

However, Vecchio (2006, p. 226) argues that although some researchers found cohesive groups to be very productive, high group cohesion has certain poor results. Despite the odds, teamwork, which is considered the result of high cohesiveness among members of a group, is considered the most effective method of product development among high-tech industries. In fact, teamwork is highly encouraged and is a de facto culture for workplaces in Silicon Valley.

To get the most out of teamwork, project management and correct leadership are important factors. Unless the equipment is properly managed, the resource could go to waste. Thus, whether or not high cohesiveness in a group can result in improved productivity depends on how the group is managed. An unmotivated employee in a group with high cohesion could demoralize the entire team and lead to reduced productivity, on the contrary, the group with high cohesion, assuming it is managed correctly and the members are motivated employees, could work miracles in some aspect. In my experience, a highly cohesive group that is well managed and with motivated members has solved technical and business problems that might otherwise be difficult to solve in a reasonable time frame.

Reference

Vecchio, RP, 2006. Organizational Behavior: Basic Concepts. 6th ed. USA: Thomson South-West [cited 19th August 2007]

Schmuck, RA and Schmuck, PA, October 2002. Group Processes in the Classroom, 8th Edition. McGraw-Hill Humanities-Social Sciences and Languages. UNITED STATES. [Cited 19th August 2007]

Moshe Barak & Tsipora Maymon, 1998. Aspects of Teamwork: Observed in a Technological Task in Lower Secondary Schools. Technological Education Magazine. Flight 9. [online] Available at http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n2/barak.html. [Cited 19th August 2007]

Losh, Susan Ph.D (2001). Group Processes: Material Guide: Six Cohesiveness II. Florida State University. [online]. Available at http://edp5285-01.sp03.fsu.edu/Guide5.html [Cited 19th August 2007]