Is a productivity within a
group higher? Have many people been engrossed in thoughts that
under certain circumstances individuals can work harder and, accordingly, make a more substantial contribution to attaining the final goal? What are the reasons for which it happens? In literature such phenomena are described as
social loafing and group cohesiveness. Group
cohesiveness is beneficial; however, sometimes group cohesiveness can also be negative.
However, in order to proceed with a discussion of social loafing and group cohesiveness, it is vital to define what these terms mean. So, social loafing is described as “the reduction in motivation and effort when individuals work collectively compared with when they work individually or coactively” (Social Loafing – Why teammates..n.d.). Moreover, if
teammates realize that they will not receive either reward or any kind of reproach, their efforts will decrease substantially (Ratzburg, 2007). Additionally, in accordance with data of an experiment carried out by Ringelmann, the more people joined the group, the efforts put by every person in the group decreased (Ratzburg, 2007). Why does this phenomenon occur in real life? First of all, the size of the group exerts a considerable influence, specifically: in large group it is very easy to slack off as the leader will evaluate the general performance and a result of the set assignment (Social Loafing – Why teammates..n.d.). Secondly, as individuals consider that other members will not try to put all efforts in order to complete a task, they act in the same way (Social Loafing – Why teammates..n.d.). Thirdly, some individuals may believe that the results of the assignment are not so crucial personally for them. Accordingly, they reduce their efforts (Social Loafing – Why teammates..n.d.). Fourthly, sometimes the attitude of team members to the assignment is not positive. As a result, in their opinion, the game is not worth the candle (Social Loafing – Why teammates..n.d.). As a problem really exists, in what cases and under what circumstances social loafing will not take place? The first condition is a presence of a motivation: if every individual is aware that he/she will derive benefit from the task, or will be blamed or his/her efforts will be evaluated, then social loafing will not take place (Ratzburg, 2007). Furthermore, if the aim is “salient/prominent”, social loafing does not occur (Ratzburg, 2007). Also, if group members participate in the assignment personally, social loafing will not happen. Moreover, it has been proved that
cohesive groups are not inclined to social loafing: the main incentive lies in that fact that individuals are devoted to the group and want to remain in the group in future (Ratzburg, 2007). Accordingly, a group cohesiveness is “the degree to which a group exists or operates as a unified entity” (Ratzburg, 2007). The members of the group can influence other individuals of the group as they value their membership (Ratzburg, 2007). Moreover, in cohesive groups every individual listens to each other more attentively (Ratzburg, 2007). Additionally, group members cooperate with each other better than in less cohesive groups (Ratzburg, 2007). However, is a group cohesiveness always interpreted from a positive point of view? For instance, those social groups for which interaction was the driving force of their membership, spent almost the whole time not on the achievement of the goal but on interaction (Ratzburg, 2007). Accordingly, the overall performance of the group was rather low. Also, the attitude of those members who are more cohesive to “deviants” is usually rather cruel (Ratzburg, 2007). As a result, such “deviants” are very often isolated from the entire group (Ratzburg, 2007). Moreover, when some members are isolated from the whole group, conversations are held most of all among the members, while “cross-group contacts” are limited (Ratzburg, 2007). As a result, some team mates may considerthemselves to be better than others (Ratzburg, 2007). One of the signs that a group becomes less cohesive is when any member expresses a desire not to participate in a group any longer (Ratzburg, 2007). However, some members who stay in the group may not recognize that the whole group has encountered any problems (Ratzburg, 2007).
In sum, group cohesiveness is more beneficial that a social loafing; however, under certain circumstances group cohesiveness can also be negative.
Bibliography Ratzburg, W. (2007). Group Cohesion. Retrieved August 2, 2007, from
OBNotes.htm.
Web site: http://www.geocities.com/athens/forum/1650/htmlgroups18.html
Social Loafing – Why Teammates Do not Pull Their Weight (2007). Retrieved
August 2, 2007, from
OBNotes.htm.
Web site: http://www.johngedeon.com/social_loafing.doc
Ratzburg, W. (2007). Social Loafing. Retrieved August 2, 2007, from
OBNotes.htm Web site: http://geocities.com/athens/forum/1650/htmlgroups16.html
More summaries about the The link between social loafing and group cohesiveness