Groups

I have never thought about what makes a group a group until recently, when we discussed the subject in class.  There is a lot more to discuss than I would have imagined, such as the variety of forces that keep a group together.  After discussing the information in class, I find that I agree wholeheartedly, as I have many experiences to draw upon which fit the group definitions presented in class perfectly.

The main concept discussed that keeps a group together is cohesion, which is the sense that everyone in the group wants to be, and stays, together.  The idea is that everyone is mutually attracted to each other and a common goal, and sticks together no matter what.  I have definitely experienced this, most memorably in my extensive (and most recent) years in marching band, where the demand to perform is incredible, competition is fierce, and tensions run high after hours of physical exertion.  I think to some people it might appear ridiculous to put so much time, effort, and physical work into something but the group mentality accounts for it.  This particular group is a great example of all of the characteristics of a group we discussed in class.  For starters, collective efficacy is very high largely because of a tremendous sense of pride in being widely recognized as a really good band.  As a result, many people are attracted to the group, and those who are in it stick very close with one another, especially when tensions run high during practice or after a bad performance.  As a member, I have experienced all of this and would characterize the band as the best, most cohesive group I have ever been in.

On the other hand, I have also seen groups that do not work effectively, which was due to a lack of cohesion in many cases.  Unfortunately, the Blue Chip leadership program is one example that comes to mind.  As in every case, an organization is just not the right group for some people, and for some of my friends Blue Chip just does not have anything to offer.  For example, there is the belief that the program does not accomplish much (and not important, by extension), and as a result for some people there is no sense of togetherness and team because they simply do not care enough.  While this is not accurate for a majority of the group, the people for whom this is true contribute to a low efficacy in this case.

I think the descriptions of a group-attraction, unity, etc-discussed in class are spot on.  From personal experience, I feel like the characteristics of a good group are really accurately presented.  The flip side is that bad groups don't fit some of the descriptions, and I find that to be true as well.  A good group really does fit the description, and a bad group does not.