Modeling the Relationship between Cohesion and Performance in Student Work Groups

Cohesion has been central to investigators seeking insight into the dynamics of small work groups. The present paper reports the effects of cohesion on performance outcomes in the context of student work groups. Data collected from a sample of 216 students indicate that social cohesion was significant as a predictor of team effectiveness but was not a significant predictor of team effort or team work satisfaction. Task cohesion was significantly and positively related to team effort, team effectiveness, and team work satisfaction. These findings indicate that students view team membership as useful for achieving task outcomes more than for satisfying social needs. Implications for educators are discussed along with suggestions for future research. Introduction Cohesion has been defined as interpersonal attraction and shared commitment to task and the literature offers valuable insights into its components, its determinants, and the ways in which it enhances the productivity of work teams (Cohen and Bailey 1997). Cohesion has been central to investigations by sociologists and psychologists seeking insights into the workings of small groups (Carron and Brawley 2000). It has been shown to significantly influence group outcomes and to improve group performance, productivity, and achievement (Gammage, Carron, and Estabrooks 2001). Cohesion has received little attention in academic settings. This is ironic since much of the work done by students of higher education takes place in teams and the results of team efforts significantly affect learning outcomes (Bobbitt, et. al. 2000; Buckenmyer 2000; Deeter-Schmelz, Kennedy, and Ramsey 2002). The present study investigates relationships between group cohesion and performance outcomes in business student teams. The study recognizes both social and task cohesion and focuses on aspects of team performance which are appropriate in the context of business higher education. It offers both students and educators a deeper understanding of ways in which cohesion can improve performance outcomes of student teams. Group Cohesion Cohesion is defined as the tendency of a group to stick together and remain united in the pursuit of instrumental objectives and the satisfaction of members' affective needs. This definition recognizes cohesion as a two-dimensional construct representing interpersonal attraction and shared commitment to task. Consistent with earlier research, we use the term 'task cohesion' to mean the extent of motivation toward achieving the group's goals and objectives. We use the term 'social cohesion' to indicate motivation to develop and maintain social relationships within the group. (Carron, Brawley, and Widmeyer 1998; Chang and Bordia 2001; Gammage, Carron, and Estabrooks 2001). Available evidence indicates that both dimensions are correlated with other team characteristics and that both are associated with team effectiveness (Carless and DePaola 2000; Carron, Brawley, and Widmeyer 1998; Chang and Bordia 2001 ; Cohen & Bailey, 1997). A study by Jehn (1999), for example, found that teams with similar values about work and group goals are less likely to experience conflict about resource and work allocation or to engage in personal attacks. Similarly, a study of MBA student teams found that social cohesion raised levels of team effectiveness and performance as well as levels of satisfaction with teamwork (Baldwin, Bedell, and Johnson 1997). Group Performance Outcomes Evidence suggests that cohesion affects team outcomes in several ways. Of these, possibly the most important is through its effect on increased effort. Trent proposed a model of team effort as a function of cohesion along with other workgroup characteristics such as the appropriateness of assignments, clarity of targets, adequacy of resources, legitimacy of decision-making authority, and the motivational potential of work conditions. His test of the model in a study of knowledge-workers demonstrated that cohesion increased effort leading to increased team success (Trent 1998). …