CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW, AND THEORETICAL AND
2.10 Perceived Organizational Support (POS)
2.10.1 Team Cohesion (TC)
Alderfer defined the team as “a team can be defined as a social system of three or more people, which is embedded in an organization, whose members perceived themselves as much and are perceived as members by others and who collaborate on a common task” (Alderfer, 1987). Martin Hoegl and Hans Georg Gemuenden (2001) also mentioned that the accomplishment of a job is directed by the team based on how good and sound team members cooperate and interact (Hoegl et al., 2001). Team cohesion denotes the level where team members are expected to continue on the team (Cartwright, 1968). Cooper and Mullen distinguish three forces of cohesion:
“Interpersonal attraction of team members, Commitment to the team task and Group pride -team spirit” (Mullen, Copper, & Drillings, 1995). Hoegl et al. in 2001 expressed the following: “Creativity and innovation can hardly be achieved without an adequate team cohesion. If team members lack a sense of togetherness and belonging, if there is little desire to keep the team going, then intensive collaboration seems unlikely. An adequate level of cohesion is necessary to maintain a team, to engage in collaboration and thus to build the basis of creativity and innovation”
(Hoegl et al., 2001).
The recent organizational trend is to form a team-based structure to expand effective organizational functioning and to understand that designing and managing teams are essential and work better together in a critical situation (Hackman, 1987:
315-342). Research advocates that team cohesion and progressions, for example communication and collaboration, are vital to bring successful, mostly in ICT projects. The success of projects depends on effectiveness with the usefulness of a team allotted for a specific job. According to Guzzo and Dickson, 1996 “if there is team cohesion it will reflect the ability to – 1) produce outputs which are often assessed by product quality, speed and customer satisfaction. 2) provide benefits to team members such as learning, knowledge and satisfaction and 3) enhance the
team’s capability to successfully accomplish future tasks” (Dickson, 1996, 47, pp.
307-338; Hackman, 1987, pp. 315-342)
Team cohesion ensures the success of the team as well as the organization. It represents both the quality and the quantity of the contacts and interactions among members of the team (Gelbard & Carmeli, 2009). Team cohesion indicates the scope where team members have the opportunity to share their valuable information, frequent engagement, and development and learning about the awareness of a collective sense from one another. Team cohesion is crucial for POS where flows of information, constructive discussions, new learning processes, and the formation of innovative knowledge are present (Gelbard & Carmeli, 2009). This cohesion allows the team to deal with the ambiguity and complex challenges of extreme work demands. Further, it helps to choose the right decisions and efficient implementation of those decisions in a well-organized way than the team that has no or low levels of cohesion and interaction (Gelbard & Carmeli, 2009). Team cohesion encourages the team members to manage different points of view, conducting in-depth investigations, and also being able to tackle different angles regarding specific issues (Hope et al., 2011). Sufficient understanding for facilitating communication and accurate interpretations is present in team cohesion (Cronin & Weingart, 2007). Team cohesion assists with the distribution of power in such a balanced way among the members that the harmful impacts of politics are rejected, which prolongs the decision-making process properly (Eisenhardt, 1999).
Studies show that collaborative behaviors such as information sharing and communication are the secrets of a successful team, ensuing effective and innovative results as well as outcomes. Peterson et al. 2003 found that the presence of team cohesion has a significant impact on organizational outcomes but the absence of cohesion is pointed out as a “classic threat” (Dutton, 1981, pp. 1-524). Thus, team cohesion exhibits team work through POS.
Organizational support concerns the well-being of and appreciates the employee’s contributions: “Employees respond perceived organizational support with greater work effort, job satisfaction, affective organizational commitment, low levels of voluntary quitting and positive work behaviors” (Eisenberger et al., 1986, pp. 500- 507). Eisenberger also identified three psychological processes that underlie perceived
organizational support: “First, employees reciprocate perceived organizational support with a greater sense of obligation and commitment to act in a way that contributes to better organizational functioning. Second, perceived organizational support signifies caring, approval and respect, all of which are channels through which an individual’s socio-emotional needs can be fulfilled. Third, perceived organizational support augments beliefs that the organization recognizes and rewards employees who exhibit high performance”. When team cohesion is seen, then the organizational principles are appreciated the team tasks and delivered more support to empower their productivity and efficacy and thus the team senses greater obligation and commitment to produce higher quality productions as well as outcomes. Another important issue is when the team member is confident about the organizational responsibility and cares about the psychological, emotional, and social desires he or she exerts with more effort in improving teams as well as organizational outcomes.
Team cohesion is vital for the innovation outcomes of an organization, but it is clear that it is fully dependent on the shelter and supporting system of the organization. There is a strong relation within team cohesion and innovation outcomes, but this is not enough because a lack of other organizational support can create obstacles and even demoralize the whole project. However, the researchers complied together that team cohesion along with a higher level of organizational support are interrelated in such a way that the strong positive associations within team cohesion and innovation outcomes will be greater than others.
From the above discussion, some of the major indicators of team cohesion can be pointed out. Team members share information with one another. Sharing information with each other within the team members drives toward the targeted goals and objectives/productions, awareness of complying with any emerging issues or problems, and hunches for learning from other members. Team cohesion is essential for both the team and organizational effectiveness and performance (Eduardo &
Grossman, 2015). POS may offer many benefits to the employees but in cohesive teams it is realized completely. Team cohesion drives the team members to stay in a shared bond, to stay together, and to build the will to work together (Casey-campbell
& Martens, 2009). The presence of disbelief, hatred, disregard or other issues may cause the individual to think that there is no cohesive sentiment within the team, and
this makes employees less motivated and less participatory in their team work and has negative impacts on the innovation outcomes of the organization (Eduardo &
Grossman, 2015). Much of the literature has expressed that there is significant importance of teamwork that works behind the success of each innovative program.
Martin and Gemuenden (2001) stated the following in this regard: “There are six sides of the team work and they are communication, coordination, balance of member contributions, mutual support, effort and cohesion” (Martin & Gemuenden, 2001).
POS helps to improve employees’ work attitudes and behaviors. If the organization treats its employees well, then the employees guess that they may be accepted and supported by the organization, and in return they hunt for recompense for this action. As a result, they become more dedicated and hardworking (Eisenberger et al., 1986), which brings expected outcomes and thus benefits the organization (Cropanzano & Grandey, 2000).
Team cohesion improves work attitudes and boosts productivity (Barrick &
Alexander, 1987). Employees (team members) that work on a quality team, enjoying cohesion, are ensured greater job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Griffin, 1988). Howes (1995) stated the following: “If organizational support is missing, interest among team member’s wanes, as well as cohesion. As a result, total performance decline” (Howes, Citera, & Cropanzano, 1995). All of these explanations indicated that there is a link between team cohesion and innovation outcomes thus effectiveness in the presence of POS.