Kelvin Bombach

Group Dynamics

Professor Barnes

January 19, 2011

Researching Small Group Communication

In Coaches and Cohesion: The Impact of Coaching Techniques on Team Cohesion in the

Small Group Sport Setting, cohesion in the realm of sports teams is studied. While this research

has furthered our understanding of cohesion in small group sports, techniques and strategies used

by coaches to promote cohesion by the team has gone unexamined.

An often asked question is “what elements create healthy groups so that they work

harder, appear happier, and make numerous individual sacrifices, and have higher levels of

interaction that those other groups?” Cartwright describes that cohesion in a group is what leads

members to work together towards a common goal. There is also a strong feeling of “we-ness”

because the team is more likely to use “we” rather than “I” when referring to the group.

It is reasonable to conclude that a team's success or performance can have a dramatic effect on

the amount of cohesion the team has. For most small group sports, the primary reason for

sticking together is to increase the potential for obtaining success. Because team success is seen

as the ultimate goal of sports competition, many researchers believe there is a strong relationship

between cohesion and performance (Turman, 2003).

In an examination held by Martens and Peterson, 1,200 male university athletes

participating in intramural league play to determine the influences of differing levels of group

cohesiveness as a determinant of player satisfaction and team effectiveness. Results indicated

that highly cohesive teams were more successful than teams with low levels of cohesion. The
researchers concluded there is a "circular relationship between satisfaction, cohesiveness, and

success. Those teams who are more cohesive are more successful, and teams which are

successful have greater satisfaction from participation than unsuccessful teams.”

An important element to a team’s level of cohesion is a coach’s style of leadership.

Chelladurai operationalized leadership as "the behavioral process of influencing individuals and

groups toward set goals, is interpersonal in nature, entails a high degree of direct interaction with

the athletes, and bears directly on the motivation of the team members.” This definition is very

similar to cohesion, in that a coach's goal is to direct athletes toward accomplishing the group

goal (winning and satisfaction) which in turn, has a dramatic effect on the team's cohesion levels

Carron and Bennett tested intercollegiate coaches and athletes representing compatible

and incompatible dyads in order to determine those factors that were the source of stress, strain,

and incompatibility. While it was hypothesized that the critical areas would be affection and

control, interestingly, the results indicated that the predominant factor contributing to

incompatibility was inclusion behavior (Turman, 2003). The authors also observed that the

interpersonal relationships within incompatible coach-athlete dyads were characterized by

relatively detached, withdrawn, isolated behavior on the part of both the coaches and athletes.

The findings from multiple studies identify numerous techniques that deter (inequity,

embarrassment, and ridicule) and promote (bragging, sarcasm and teasing, motivational

speeches, quality of opponent, athlete directed techniques, team prayer, and dedication) team

cohesion levels. These actions can alter group dynamics and affect how one group processes.

This article is very informative of the various areas which can make or break a team, and I would

recommend it to anyone interested in team cohesion.

 Citation

Turman, P. D. (2003). Coaches and Cohesion: The Impact of Coaching Techniques on Team

Cohesion in the Small Group Sport Setting. Journal of Sport Behavior, 26(1), 86.
Retrieved from EBSCOhost.