9 dimensions to measure team cohesion

With the "Siena Pack," FeelGoodFellows aim to improve team cohesion.

But can we really measure cohesion?

A research document commissioned by the Bertelsmann Foundation and written by David Schiefer, Jolanda van der Noll, Jan Delhey, and Klaus Boehnke particularly interested us. Its purpose is to attempt to assess the degree of social cohesion on a national scale, particularly in Germany.

Could this method be transposed to evaluate team cohesion in companies?

3 main dimensions to measure cohesion

The authors identify 3 main dimensions to measure cohesion:

Social relationships
Connectedness
Orientation towards the common good

This approach to defining social cohesion is itself based on diverse references illustrated by the following diagram:

These dimensions, chosen for their recurrence in the scientific literature, allow for a broader definition of social cohesion. Here is how the authors formulate it:

Cohesion is a descriptive attribute of a collective and expresses the quality of social cooperation. A cohesive society is characterised by close social relationships, intensive emotional connectedness, and a pronounced orientation towards the common good. We define cohesion
as a graduated phenomenon, which means that societies may exhibit greater or lesser degrees of cohesion. This degree of cohesion is expressed in the attitudes and the behaviour of the members and social groups within the society. Its character is both ideational and relational.

The authors therefore estimate that:

one can measure a society's cohesion.
one can determine a degree of cohesion of a society based on the 3 main dimensions identified
this degree of cohesion will be representative of the capacity of said society to cooperate.

Furthermore, the authors deliberately set aside so-called "distributive" dimensions, which concern the distribution of resources (for example, equality or quality of life). According to them, these aspects are more often consequences or influences of social cohesion, rather than intrinsic components.

How to concretely measure cohesion?

To evaluate these dimensions, researchers primarily rely on surveys, supplemented by empirical data. They subdivide the three main dimensions into nine sub-dimensions, detailed below:

1. Social Relationships

Social networking: Quality and quantity of relationships and networks
Examples of measures/questions:
- If you found yourself in a difficult situation, do you have someone to help you?
- How often do you meet friends, close ones, and colleagues (socially)?
- How often have you felt lonely during the past week?
Participation: Political and socio-cultural participation (associations, volunteering...)
Examples of measures/questions:
- Number of people members of political, environmental, sports associations...etc
- % of population voting in elections
Trust: General trust in other humans, political institutions, and authority figures
Examples of measures/questions: already a standard indicator in national and international surveys, making the data easier to collect.

Acceptance of diversity: Attitude between groups and tolerance towards minorities
Examples of measures/questions: Mainly assessed through surveys in which phrases or stereotypes towards minorities are proposed for respondents to express their opinion. For example, respondents should indicate whether they agree with the statement: "Homeless people should be removed from pedestrian areas."

2. Connectedness

According to the authors, the sense of belonging to a society (or to a region or community) and identification with that society are closely related concepts.

Sense of belonging corresponds to the self-perception as a member of a group – a sense of unity.
In contrast, identification is defined more precisely as the feeling that a particular group is an integral part of oneself.

Thus, the self-concept and personal identity (Who am I? What defines me?) are partly constructed through belonging to specific groups.

Although, theoretically, a clear distinction can be made between the feeling of belonging (more emotional) and identification (more cognitive), the empirical indicators used to evaluate them cannot always be definitively attributed to one or the other of these two concepts. For this reason, the authors treat these two notions in a common discussion, using shared indicators.

Examples of measures/questions:

What geographical unit do you feel you belong to first? City, Region, Country, World?
To what degree do you feel connected to your country?

3. Orientation towards the common good

Social responsibility: Defined as defending the interests of society even at the expense of one's own goals and needs
Examples of measures/questions:
- Do you feel obliged to do something for your country, such as volunteering?
- Do you agree with the statement: "I don't see why I should make a sacrifice for other compatriots I don't even know."?
- Do you agree with the statement: "I pay taxes, that's enough."?
Solidarity: Cooperation and support with and for fellow citizens
Examples of measures/questions:
- Amount of donations to charities
- To what degree do you feel people help each other in your neighborhood?
- Would you help elderly or strangers because "it's in the interests of society"?
Acceptance of the social order and social rules: Respect for social institutions and adherence to common life rules (as well as the rules for changing the social order) Vs. disdain and transgressions of them.
Examples of measures/questions:
- Crime rates
- Report of violations of certain norms such as taking public transport without tickets
- Corruption perception index