Measuring Team Cohesion

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to review literature relevant to cohesion measurement, explore developing measurement approaches, and provide theoretical and practical recommendations for optimizing cohesion measurement.Background: Cohesion is essential for team effectiveness and performance, leading researchers to focus attention on understanding how to enhance it. However, cohesion is inconsistently defined and measured, making it difficult to compare findings across studies and limiting the ability to advance science and practice.Method: We reviewed empirical research through which we uncovered specific information about cohesion's conceptualization, measurement, and relationships with performance, culminating in a set of current trends from which we provide suggestions and possible solutions to guide future efforts and help the field converge toward greater consistency.Results: Cohesion demonstrates more significant relationships with performance when conceptualized using social and task (but not other) dimensions and when analyses are performed at the team level. Cohesion is inherently temporal, yet researchers rarely measure cohesion at multiple points during the life of a team. Finally, cohesion matters in large, dynamic collectives, complicating measurement. However, innovative and unobtrusive methodologies are being used, which we highlight.Conclusion: Practitioners and researchers are encouraged to define cohesion with task and social subdimensions and to measure with behavioral and attitudinal operationalizations. Individual and team-oriented items are recommended, though teamlevel analyses are most effective. Innovative/unobtrusive methods should be further researched to enable cohesion measurement longitudinally and in large, dynamic collectives.Application: By applying our findings and conclusions, researchers and practitioners will be more likely to find consistent, reliable, and significant cohesion-to-performance relationships.

Employee–Organization Relationships and Team Performance: Role of Team Collective Efficacy

“…Although aggregation of the perception of every member is common in the literature, asking supervisors to rate the teamlevel constructs was feasible. Two reasons may allow them to provide unbiased or trained ratings (Salas et al, 2015). First, team supervisors have sufficient knowledge on entire teams through everyday observations and interactions with team members.…”

Cognitive Distances between Evaluators and Evaluees in Research Evaluation: A Comparison between Three Informetric Methods at the Journal and Subject Category Aggregation Level

“…For instance, our approaches do not consider the aspect of cohesion (Casey-Campbell and Martens, 2009). Cohesion is the common bond that drives colleagues to remain together and to cooperate (Salas et al, 2015). In some cases, a PM could be included in a panel for other reasons than their specific research expertise in relation to the research groups.…”

Automatic Group Cohesiveness Detection With Multi-modal Features

“…Measuring and annotating group cohesion at different levels is often difficult for a human annotator, because cohesion has team and individual components [19]. The problem of group cohesiveness prediction becomes even more challenging in static images.…”