A Factor-Analytic Study Exploring the Factors of Co-Worker Cohesion

Abstract

Despite the applied importance of cohesion within organisational settings, researchers have yet to reach consensus about the dimensionality of group cohesion, and therefore appropriate tools for its measurement. The way that cohesion has generally been conceptualised has changed over time, but the measures appear not to reflect the underlying theory. This deficiency has impeded attempts to explore the relationship between co-worker cohesion and group performance (Beal et al., 2003; Mullen & Copper, 1994). Given inconsistent findings from previous factor analyses of cohesion, the present study employed exploratory means to help clarify the factor structure of cohesion within the workplace. Potential participants were recruited via the researchers' social networks. This snowballing technique led to 236 participants completing the online questionnaire. Exploratory factor analysis revealed four first-order factors of team commitment, friendliness, interpersonal conflict and communication that collectively accounted for 55.17% of the variance shared among the 75 cohesion items. Subsequently, a single higher-order factor was extracted which accounted for over half of the co-variation among the first order factors. This higher-order factor seems to reflect a general cohesion factor, as it was loaded by a diffuse collection of items, including those from the four lower-order factors as well as items that failed to load onto these lower-order factors. While there were similarities between these results and those of previous studies, the present factor structure did not map perfectly onto any of the existing conceptual models of cohesion. This finding highlights the need to incorporate some alternate factors that have previously been given little consideration.

Visualizing the Ties That Bind Us: A Cross-Sectional Thematic and Visual Analysis of Cohesion Across Three British Military Formations

“…The recurring modularity visible in Figures 1 to 4 indicates that cohesion is a multidimensional concept, where some factors (e.g., professional competence, trust, leadership) may be more representative of task cohesion, whereas shared experiences and proximity appear to be more representative of social cohesion. This is in line with recent quantitative scholarship, which suggests that the performance–cohesion relationship may be subject to the level of analysis and the conceptualization of the social and task dimensions (Forsyth, 2021; Grossman et al, 2022; Salas et al, 2015; Treuer et al,2010, 2018).…”

Determining the components of cohesion using the repertory grid technique.

“…Carron et al (1985) subsequently performed an exploratory factor analysis that resulted in a four-factor solution. Subsequent efforts to confirm the four-factor model of group cohesion advocated by Carron et al (1985) have failed (Ahronson & Cameron, 2007; Carless & De Paola, 2000; Dyce & Cornell, 1996; Eys, Loughead, Bray, & Carron, 2009; Li & Harmer, 1996; Schutz, Eom, Smoll, & Smith, 1994; Sullivan, Short, & Cramer, 2002; von Treuer, Fuller-Tyzkiewicz, & Atkinson, 2010).…”

“…A complementary line of investigation would be to quantify and crystallize the structure of cohesion using factor analytic or similar methods. Examination of various instruments using factor analytic techniques has already been undertaken (von Treuer et al, 2010). However, the only constructs that can emerge are those that have items in the instruments used.…”

The Mediating Roles of Happiness and Cohesion in the Relationship between Employee Volunteerism and Job Performance

“…Happiness literature reveals that happiness precedes numerous positive outcomes as well as behaviors that parallel success [69]. Likewise, cohesion is an important construct that induces various attitudinal and behavioral outcomes such as morale, job satisfaction, problem solving ability, and quality of life (e.g., [70]). Thus, the study findings provide a theoretical basis for research moving forward by suggesting that employee volunteerism may have indirect effects on other workplace attitudes and behaviors beyond in-role behavior and helping behavior.…”