Business borrowed the term “team” from the world of sports, to label an interim group of people mobilized to deliver towards a common goal (product, project). We’re hoping the team will inherit the glory and sense of purpose glowing from National Teams, along with the motivation to train hard to be amongst the prospects; to actually get selected; and to fight like a champion once you’ve made it “all the way”.
We’re setting the highest standards for team performance, and we understand that teams don’t just go to work. They need to be built! Some will look to Bruce Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development to understand the relationship-dynamics in teams, starting off as a loosely connected group of individuals, evolving in four clearly identifiable stages: Forming, Storming, Norming – and finally: Performing. Others may believe teams will flourish if the individual personalities are sourced and joined in certain ways, using tools such as Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Or other approaches, or a mix over time, as teams are continuously built and re-built.
As a team leader, in your day-to-day work you will typically nurture two types of coherence: task and social coherence, maybe sometimes stimulating the latter to improve the former. Meaning: team dinners or “outings” to improve performance.
However, the task/social coherence presents a classical chicken-and-egg problem: will a team with coherent and logically interdependent task also enjoy a great social life, or vice versa – a team having fun socially will make an extra effort to work together well? Research points to task-coherence as the decisive factor.
To understand task coherence, let’s borrow some more from the world of sports:
- A team of single-sculler rowers will have a low task cohesion. Although the athletes may be part of the same delegation, they don’t have to work together but will each be in their own boat;
- A relay team of swimmers or runners will be acting serially, one will prepare the action for the next to complete in a pro-act/re-act chain – you could argue such a team has medium task coherence;
- A football team has high task coherence, each athlete continuously working with the others – passing the ball, maintaining a position, coordinating attacks
In terms of performance, social coherence is irrelevant for the task – only task coherence is needed (in some contexts, social coherence can even be detrimental to performance, diluting competition between team members). The sense of doing everything for the team is documented to be greater in teams that require extensive interaction, coordination and cooperation.
Social cohesion may increase as a result of success. Everyone loves winning, and winning may lead us to see teammates in a more favorable light. At the other end of the social cohesion spectrum, the notion of being stuck with a group of people you really don’t like, or where the level of competition is excessive, is not very attractive. Social cohesion doesn’t hurt, spending time with people you like is endlessly more pleasant.
However, it’s imperative for performance to stay on-task. If you come across a team with an amazing social life, but little task cohesion, it’s time to refocus on the set goals (even at the expense of the good vibes). As a team leader wanting to promote team success, pay attention to the way the team collaborates, look out for the effects of competition and collaboration, and also have a keen eye for individual goals.
Pleasant and fun as they surely often are, social events will stimulate many things – company loyalty, family support, employer brand, etc. But in terms of performance, team dinners are really only dinners with the team.