Introduction
The relationship between performance and group cohesiveness has been of great interest to many researchers. Many conflicting conclusions have been drawn by different scientists, who have researched the effect of team cohesiveness on performance and productivity. According to research carried out by Steiner in 1972, cohesiveness in a team does not influence its performance and productivity (Drillings, 1995).
This negative portrayal of the relationship between team cohesiveness and performance is supported by many textbooks on organizational behavior. However, other researches such as the one carried out by Summers et al. in 1988 concluded that team cohesiveness promoted productivity (Drillings, 1995). Despite all these conflicting results, team cohesiveness has a direct influence on performance and productivity, according to the discussions from the article selected.
Factors Affecting Team Cohesiveness and Productivity
Type of Team
According to the article, cohesiveness in a team correlates with its performance. This is shown by comparing well-established groups, referred to as the correlational paradigm and the ad hoc teams referred to as the experimental paradigm (Drillings, 1995). The article emphasizes that the continuous cohesiveness in well-established teams can be attributed to close interactions between group members and this is responsible for their excellent performance and productivity.
On the other hand, members of ad hoc teams that are assembled for a certain purpose and disbanded afterward, exhibit low levels of cohesiveness and performance compared to the well-established teams. This is because members of the team interact within a limited period, increasing the probability of conflicts and friction and this negatively affects the performance and productivity of the team (Drillings, 1995).
Team Structure
Another factor that affects the team productivity is the participation by each member towards achieving the laid down goals and objectives (Prokopenko, 1987). Tasks are equally divided among the team members and each one of them is expected to complete their duties on time, as this optimizes productivity and performance of the team. Heterogeneous teams exhibit negative performance since members have diverse opinions that are less cohesive. Teams should also have clear structures of leadership since wrangles and infighting between members affect productivity.
Team Size
The size of the team affects its performance since larger groups encourage individualization between the group members. Furthermore, as the team increases, the members liking for the team decreases and this invariably decreases its performance and productivity (Drillings, 1995). Large groups are more heterogeneous and this leads to a decrease in cohesiveness between the members and also increases the probability of conflicts and leadership wrangles. Smaller teams perform better since they have higher levels of interaction and all members are likely to contribute positively towards the success of the group (Drillings, 1995).
Conclusion
The article brings out the direct relationship between cohesiveness and performance. This can be attributed to the logic that team cohesiveness energizes the members to work hard towards ensuring success in the completion of tasks. Conversely, everyone in the group works hard, as the excellent performance of the team makes group members feel proud of being associated with the team. According to the article, cohesiveness influences the performance of the team because members put more effort in accomplishing a task not for their benefit, but for the pleasure of belonging to a highly successful team (Drillings, 1995). Therefore, organizations hoping to improve the performance and productivity of teams must strive to increase the commitment of employees’ to team tasks.
References
Drillings, M. (1995). Cohesiveness and performance. Web.
Prokopenko, J. (1987). Productivity management. International Labour Organization, Geneva.