The Importance of Organizational Context, II: An Empirical Test of Work Group Cohesiveness and Effectiveness in Two Governmental Bureaucracies

ABSTRACT The authors test a model of the effects of cohesiveness and group norms on group effectiveness given differences in bureaucratic context--specifically, interunit interdependence and social support. Data from survey studies of two diverse government hierarchies are used. Multiple regression was used to test hypotheses. Results provided support for the proposed model and hypotheses. INTRODUCTION In an article in the previous part of this issue, the authors presented a conceptual model of the relationship between cohesiveness and effectiveness in work groups. They discussed how this relationship could differ, depending on organizational context. They reaffirmed the moderating influence of group norms on the cohesiveness-effectiveness relationship and argued that groups with high cohesiveness and strong task-related norms will outperform other groups.1 The relationship between cohesiveness, task norms, and effectiveness will operate differently at different levels of analysis (Guzzo and Dickson, 1996). Cohesiveness interacts with task norms in different ways at the group level than at the individual level. At the group level, the importance of cohesiveness depends on the organizational division of labor in ways that fundamentally affect a group's performance. At the individual level, cohesiveness may provide information and support to individuals independently of its effects on the group level. From the model the authors develop three research hypotheses. The first sums up their general expectations regarding the interaction between group tasks norms and cohesiveness. The second and third hypotheses pertain to specific aspects of organizational context. Hypothesis 2 concerns their expectation that, in a context of low task interdependence, cohesiveness may be positively associated with effectiveness even in the absence of strong tasks norms due to the informational and social support provided by a cohesive group. Hypothesis 3 concerns the authors' expectation that, in a context of high task interdependence, high cohesiveness and weak task norms will be associated with poorer performance. The authors frame hypotheses 2 and 3 in terms of the specific organizations studied. A state family service agency, characterized by low task interdependence, provides the first context. A combat military unit, characterized by high task interdependence, provides a different context. The three hypotheses are: H1: The combination of high cohesiveness and strong task norms will lead to higher group effectiveness than any other combination. H2: In family service agency work groups, high cohesiveness and weak task norms will lead to equal or better effectiveness than low cohesiveness and weak task norms/ H3: In military work groups, high cohesiveness and weak task norms will lead to lower effectiveness than any other combination. In this article, the authors report on empirical tests of these hypotheses. Below, they first discuss the study design and methods, then report the results of the data analysis, and finally discuss the findings and draw conclusions regarding the implications of their work for organizational development efforts in both public and private sectors. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN The authors studied two different organizations using the same survey instruments and the same data collection procedures. The first was the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). The second was a combat regiment in the Danish military. Data for DCFS were collected in 1991 and for the military unit in 1995. In terms of Wilson's (1989:168) typology of bureaucracy, DCFS can be seen as a "coping" organization characterized by uncertainty in evaluating the effectiveness of strategic and internal action. In such a case, the organization suffers from low levels of uncertainty and pressure. The absence of a well-defined technology places the primary burden for coping with environmental uncertainty and turbulence on the actions and decisions of local workforces. …