This study examined a work-adapted version of the Group Environment Questionnaire. The sample consisted of 120 employees of an Australian public sector organization who worked in teams. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine four alternate models. None of the models examined fit the data, thus the scale was revised. Subscales of the work-group characteristics scale were used to demonstrate the construct validity of the revised scale; regional managers’ratings of work-group performance were used to examine the criterion-related validity. The findings showed that task cohesion compared to social cohesion and individual attraction to the group was the strongest correlate of all the variables examined.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anastastasi, A. , & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice Hall.
2.
Back, K. (1950). The exertion of influence through social communication. In L. Festinger, K. Back, S. Schachter, H. H. Kelley, & J. Thibaut (Eds.), Theory and experiment in social communication (pp. 21-36). Ann Arbor, MI: Edwards Bros.
3.
Bettenhausen, K. L. (1991). Five years of group research: What we have learned and what needs to be addressed. Journal of Mangement, 17, 345-381.
4.
Bollen, K. , & Hoyle, R. H. (1990). Perceived cohesiveness: A conceptual and empirical examination. Social Forces, 69, 479-504.
5.
Browne, M. W. , & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternate ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Campion, M. A. , Medsker, G. A., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between work team characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designing effective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823-850.
7.
Carless, S. A. (1995). Transformational leadership and Australian bank managers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Australia.
8.
Carron, A. V. (1988). Group dynamics in sport. London, Ontario: Spodym.
9.
Carron, A. V. , Widmeyer, W. N., & Brawley, L. R. (1985). The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The Group Environment Questionnaire. Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 244-266.
10.
Cohen, S. , & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239-290.
11.
Cota, A. , Longman, R., Evans, C., Dion, K., & Kilik, L. (1995). Using and misusing factor analysis to explore group cohesion. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51, 308-316.
12.
Cronbach, L. J. (1990). Essentials of psychological testing (5th ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
13.
Cuttance, P. (1987). Issues and problems in the application of structural equation models. In P. Cuttance & R. Ecob (Eds.), Structural modelling by example: Applications in educational, sociological, and behavioral research (pp. 241-279). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Dyce, J. A. , & Cornell, J. (1996). Factorial validity of the Group Environment Questionnaire among musicians. The Journal of Social Psychology, 136, 263-264.
15.
Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271-282.
16.
Fleishman, E. A. , & Peters, D. A. (1962). Interpersonal values, leadership attitudes and managerial success. Personnel Psychology, 15, 127-143.
17.
Gerbing, D. , & Hamilton, J. G. (1996). Viability of exploratory factor analysis as a precursor to confirmatory factor analysis. Structural Equation Modelling, 3, 62-72.
18.
Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administration Science Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
19.
Griffith, J. (1988). Measurement of group cohesion in U.S. army units. Basic and Applied Psychology, 9, 149-171.
20.
Guzzo, R. A. , & Shea, G. P. (1992). Group performance and intergroup relations in organizations. In M. D. Dunnette & L. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, 2nd ed., pp. 269-313). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press.
21.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). New York: Prentice Hall.
22.
Hersey, P. , & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Life cycle theory of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 23, 26-34.
23.
Hinkin, T. R. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21, 967-988.
24.
Hogg, M. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. New York: John Wiley.
25.
Joreskog, K. , & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.
26.
Langfred, C. W. (1998). Is group cohesiveness a double-edged sword? An investigation of the effects of cohesiveness of performance. Small Group Research, 29, 124-143.
27.
Lott, A. J. , & Lott, B. E. (1965). Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction. Psychological Bulletin, 64, 259-309.
28.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). New York: American Council on Education and MacMillan.
29.
Mudrack, P. (1989). Group cohesiveness and productivity: A closer look. Human Relations, 42, 771-785.
30.
Mullen, B. , & Copper, C. (1994). The relations between group cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 210-227.
31.
O’Reilly, C. A., III , & Caldwell, D. F. (1985). The impact of normative social influence and cohesiveness on task perceptions and attitudes: A social information processing approach. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58, 193-206.
32.
Piper, W. E. , Marrache, M., Lacroix, R., Richardson, A. M., & Jones, B. D. (1983). Cohesion as a basic bond in groups. Human Relations, 36, 93-108.
33.
Schachter, S. (1951). Deviation, rejection, and communication. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 46, 190-207.
34.
Spector, P. E. , & Brannick, M. T. (1995). The nature and effects of method variance in organizational research. In C. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 10, (pp. 249-274). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
35.
Stogdill, R. M. (1972). Group productivity, drive, and cohesivness. Organizational Behavior and Human Peformance, 8, 26-53.
36.
Sundstrom, E. , De Meuse, K., & Futrell, D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120-133.
37.
Wech, B. A. , Mossholder, K. W., Steel, R. P., & Bennett, N. (1998). Does work group cohesiveness affect individuals’performance and organizational commitment? A cross-level examination. Small Group Research, 29, 472-494.
38.
Weiss, D. J. , Dawis, R. V., England, G. W., & Lofquist, L. H. (1967). Manual for the Minnesota satisfaction quesionnaire. (Minnesota Studies in Vocational Rehabilitation, No. 22). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
39.
Widmeyer, W. N. , Brawley, L. R., & Carron, A. V. (1985). The measurement of cohesion in sports teams: The group environment questionnaire. London, Ontario: Sports Dynamics.
40.
Zaccaro, S. (1991). Nonequivalent associations between forms of cohesiveness and group-related outcomes: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 387-399.
41.
Zaccaro, S. , & Lowe, C. (1988). Cohesiveness and performance: Evidence for multidimensionality. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 547-558.
