The use of teams is common in churches and ministry organizations. This article examines one aspect of team development: the nature of and facilitation of unity within a team. By reviewing both the biblical foundations of unity and the social science research on the related concept of cohesion, implications for ministry leadership are identified.
BealD. J., CohenR. R., BurkeM. J., & McLendonC. L. (2003). Cohesion and performance in groups: A meta-analytic clarification of construct relations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(6), 989–1004.
2.
Beasley-MurrayG. R. (1987). John.Word biblical commentary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
3.
BlombergC. L. (1994). 1 Corinthians.The NIV application commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
4.
BurgeG. (2000). John.The NIV application commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
5.
CallowN., SmithM. J., HardyL., ArthurC. A., & HardyJ. (2009). Measurement of transformational leadership and its relationship with team cohesion and performance level. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21(4), 395–412.
6.
CarronA. V., BrawleyL. R., & WindmeyerW. N. (1998). The measurement of cohesive-ness in sport groups. In Joan DudaL. (Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 213–226). Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.
7.
ChiocchioF., & EssiembreH. (2009). Cohesion and performance: A meta-analytic review of disparities between project teams, production teams, and service teams. Small Group Research, 40(4), 382–420.
8.
EguizabalO., & LawsonK. E. (2009a). Leading ministry teams, part 1: Theological reflection on ministry teams. Christian Education Journal, Series 3, 6(2), 250–264.
9.
EguizabalO., & LawsonK. E. (2009b). Leading ministry teams, part 2: Research on effective teams with implications for ministry team leadership. Christian Education Journal, Series 3, 6(2), 265–281.
10.
FeeG. (1987). The first epistle to the Corinthians.The new international commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
11.
ForresterW. R., & TashchianA. (2004). Characteristics of work groups and their relationship with social and task cohesion in student teams. Psychological Reports, 95(1), 207–214.
12.
HartwigR. T., & BirdW. (2015). Teams that thrive: Five disciplines of collaborative church leadership.Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books.
13.
KnouseS. B. (2006). Task cohesion: A mechanism for bringing together diverse teams. International Journal of Management, 23(3), 588–596.
14.
KozlowskiS. W., & IlgenD. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77–124.
15.
LeviD. (2011). Group dynamics for teams.Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
16.
LincolnA. T. (1990). Ephesians.Word biblical commentary. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
17.
MooreA., & MamiseishviliK. (2012). Examining the relationship between emotional intelligence and group cohesion. Journal of Education for Business, 87(5), 296–302.
18.
O'NeilT. A., & KlineT. J. B. (2008). Personality as a predictor of teamwork: A business simulator study. North American Journal of Psychology, 10(1), 65–77.
19.
SnodgrassK. (1996). Ephesians.The NIV application commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
20.
TekleabA. G., QuigleyN. R., & TeslukP. E. (2009). A longitudinal study of team conflict, conflict management, cohesion, and team effectiveness. Group & Organization Management, 34(2), 170–205.
21.
WheelanS. A. (2016). Creating effective teams: A guide for members and leaders (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
