Chapter 10: Team Cohesion Flashcards
Characteristics of a team (5)
- supportive and/or depend on each other
- feeling collective identity, distinctiveness
- structured modes of communication
- goal of obtaining common desired objectives
- group self-efficacy exists
3 models of how teams form / how cohesion evolves (describe in diff. cards)
- Linear model of cohesion - Tuckman
- Budge pendular model of cohesion - Budge
- Life cycle model of cohesion
Linear model of cohesion - Tuckman (1/3 models of how teams form / how cohesion evolves)
- forming
- storming
- norming
- performing
- adjourning
Pendular model of cohesion - Budge (4) (1/3 models of how teams form / how cohesion evolves)
- Orientation: share anxieties, aspirations, hope
- Differentiation and conflict: subdivide, roles
- Resolution and cohesion: prep for common threat
- Termination: season finish = consequences
Life cycle model of cohesion (1/3 models of how teams form / how cohesion evolves)
cohesion changes over time within group
Describe Group Structure - Roles
- shared expectations of beh. that differentiate members
- formal (assigned) vs informal (evolve from group)
- role clarity vs ambiguity - indv. role understanding
- role acceptance - want to enact role
- avoidance of role conflicts
3 types of Role Conflicts
- Intrarole: contradictory demands for 1 indv. in single role (told to be aggressive, penalty for doing so)
- Interrole: 1 indv. enacting 2 roles with conflicting expectations (player-manager=playing and firing)
- Person-role: unable/unwilling to fulfill duties (moved to new position on team)
Group Norms, what they’re established for and how they’re developed
- structured rules that govern manner in which group is organized and maintained
- established for practices, effort, attitude and member relationships
- Developed via critical members (coach, captain), critical events, primacy (1st beh.), carryout behs. (from other groups)
Composition and how it increases performance
- degree group hetero/homogeneity can affect interactions and productivity
- similarity increases performance = sports of similar tasks
- diversity increases performance = sports of distinct tasks
Steiner’s model of Groups and Performance
- As group size increases, more potential for productivity BUT efficiency of group processes suffer, decrease in performance can result
- Performance dependent on how much ability each member has, similarity of abilities + effort each member contributes and effectiveness of team strategies - timing, predicting each others’ actions
Social loafing is reduced when… (7)
- indv. outputs may be measured
- indv. contributions to outcome are perceived to be significant
- task has meaning
- positive feelings toward each other
- other teammates perceived to be equal
- competition perceived to be high in ability
- empathy of player position
Cohesion
dynamic process reflected in tendency for group to stick together and remain united in pursuit of its goals
2 types of cohesion
- Task: degree that group members work toward common goal
2. Social: degree of interpersonal attraction btwn. group members
Determinants of cohesion (5)
- personal satisfaction
- communication
- team prior success
- proximity - interaction, familiarity
- team efficacy/collective efficacy (enhanced with mastery climate)
Consequences of cohesion (7)
- improved performance
- improved team efficacy
- perceived psychological momentum
- team stability
- excuses/external blame less acceptable
- enhanced mood - see pre-performance anxiety as facilitative; increases perceptions of competence, autonomy and relatedness (self-determination theory)
- personal satisfaction, growth
Example of halo effect
star player does bad act - no big deal
Conceptual model of team cohesion and its 4 types
- describes importance of both athletes’ own indv. attraction to group and his/her feelings about group as a whole
1. Indv. attraction to group - social cohesion
2. Indv. attraction to group - task cohesion
3. Group integration - social cohesion
4. Group integration - task cohesion
Direct measurement of team cohesion (plus example)
- members asked about feelings toward team and team members
i. e. Group Environment Questionnaire: measures members’ attraction in 4 ways across 2 dimensions: - both social and task aspects of members’ indv. attraction to group
- both social and task aspects of group integration
Indirect measurement of team cohesion (example only)
Sociogram: examines particular patterns of relationships within team
Carron’s model of cohesion (include the 3 factors)
- describes how a number of factors influence development of cohesion:
1. Environmental: contractual obligations, organizational orientation
2. Personal: traits, motivations, mindset
3. Team: team characteristics (stability, size)
Collective efficacy
belief team members will act together to reach performance goals
Strategies for Building Team Cohesion (for coaches and team members)
Coaches: create task-focused team climate - emphasis on progress, not just winning
Team members: positive reinforcement, avoid conflicts
Coactive, Dyadic and Interactive sports
Coactive: little interaction btwn. members (golf, skiing)
Dyadic: 2 players coordinate actions (doubles tennis, beach volleyball)
Interactive: players coordinate actions (soccer, hockey)
