Jelena Z. Golubović
Ministarstvo unutrašnjih poslova RS, Beograd, Srbija, Stevana Đurđevića Trošarinca, 8/6, 11030 Beograd, Srbija
Vesna M. Milanović
Univerzitet „Union-Nikola Tesla“, Beograd, Poslovni i pravni fakultet, Mladenovac-Beograd, Knez Mihailova 33, 11000 Beograd, Srbija
Andrea D. Bučalina Matić
Megatrend univerzitet, Beograd, Fakultet za poslovne studije, Beograd, Bulevar maršala Tolbuhina 8, 11000 Beograd, Srbija

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31410/EMAN.2019.559

3rd International Scientific Conference – EMAN 2019 – Economics and Management: How to Cope With Disrupted Times, Ljubljana – Slovenia, March 28, 2019, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS published by: Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans, Belgrade, Serbia; Faculty of Management Koper, Slovenia; Doba Business School – Maribor, Slovenia; Integrated Business Faculty –  Skopje, Macedonia; Faculty of Management – Zajecar, Serbia, ISBN 978-86-80194-17-2, ISSN 2683-4510

Sadržaj:

U radu je prezentovana raznolikost odnosa između komunikacije, grupne kohezije i ishoda tj. zadovoljstva i performansi koji su posmatrani na individualnom i grupnom nivou. Komunikacija je posmatrana kroz informacionu i relacionu dimenziju, komunikaciju licem u lice i elektronsku komunikaciju. Grupna kohezija je posmatrana kroz dimenziju kohezije zadatka grupe i društvenu dimenziju kohezije grupe. Performanse su posmatrane kroz individualne performanse posla, performanse zadatka grupe i kontekstualne performanse. Zadovoljstvo je posmatrano kroz individualno zadovoljstvo poslom i zadovoljstvo zadatkom grupe. Sve navedene varijable imaju osobinu multidimenzionalnosti koja čini da su njihovi međusobni odnosi složeni i još uvek nedovoljno jasni. Zbog toga su i dalje aktuelno područje istraživanja koja imaju multidisciplinarni karakter. Ciljevi ovog rada su: 1) da predstavi grupnu koheziju, komunikaciju, zadovoljstvo i performanse kao multidimenzionalne konstrukte 2) da prezentuje važne nalaze dosadašnjih istraživanja o njihovim međusobnim odnosima i da se na osnovu toga izvedu zaključci o relacijama u kojima se nalaze njihove pojedinačne dimenzije. Shodno navedenom postavljena je struktura rada. Istraživanje relevantne literature je sprovedeno tokom poslednjeg kvartala 2018. godine. Dobijeni rezultati potvrđuju složenost svih varijabli, i raznolikost njihovih međusobnih odnosa koji su redstavljeni kroz tri celine: komunikacija – performanse, komunikacija – grupna kohezija; grupna kohezija – performanse; grupna kohezija – zadovoljstvo – performanse.

Ključne reči:

grupna kohezija, komunikacija, zadovoljstvo, performanse, odnosi, raznolikost.

LITERATURA

[1] Al-Yaaribi, A. and Kavussanu, M. (2017) “Teammate prosocial and antisocial behaviors predict task cohesion and burnout: the mediating role of affect”, Journal of sport and exercise psychology, 39(3)/2017, pp. 199-208, https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.2016-0336
[2] Ariely, G. (2014) “Does Diversity Erode Social Cohesion? Conceptual and Methodological Issues”, Political Studies, 62(3)/2014, pp. 573-595, https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467- 9248.12068
[3] Evans, C. R. and Dion, K. L. (1991) “Group Cohesion and Performance: A Meta-Analysis”, Small Group Research, 22(2)/1991, pp. 175–186, https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496491222002
[4] Mullen, B. and Copper, C. (1994) “The relation between group cohesiveness and performance: Integration“, Psychological Bulletin, 115(2)/1994, pp. 210-227, https://dx.doi. org/10.1037//0033-2909.115.2.210
[5] Pescosolido, A. T. and Saavedra, R. (2012) “Cohesion and Sports Teams A Review”, Small Group Research, 43(6)/2012, pp. 744-758, https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496412465020
[6] Salas, E., Grossman, R., Hughes, A. M. and Coultas, C. W. (2015) “Measuring team cohesion: Observations from the science”, Human Factors, 57(3)/2015, pp. 365-374, 10.1177/0018720815578267
[7] Shin, Y. and Song, K. (2011) “Role of face‐to‐face and computer‐mediated communication time in the cohesion and performance of mixed‐mode groups”, Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 14(2)/2011, pp. 126-139, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-839X.2010.01341.x
[8] Tulin, M., Pollet, T. V. and Lehmann-Willenbrock, N. (2018). “Perceived group cohesion versus actual social structure: A study using social network analysis of egocentric Facebook networks”, Social Science Research, 74(August)/2018, pp. 161-175, doi: 10.1016/j. ssresearch.2018.04.004
[9] Wise, S. (2014) “Can a team have too much cohesion? The dark side to network density. European Management Journal, 32(5)/2014, pp. 703-711, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. emj.2013.12.005
[10] Banwo, А. О., Du, J. and Onokala, U. (2015) “The Impact of Group Cohesiveness on Organizational Performance: The Nigerian Case”, International Journal of Business and Management, 10(6)/2015, pp. 146-154.
[11] Casey-Campbell, M. and Martens, M. L. (2009) “Sticking it all together: a critical assessment of the group cohesion-performance literature”, International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(2)/2009, pp. 223–246.
[12] Chang, A. and Bordia, P. (2001) “A multidimensional approach to the group cohesion-group performance relationship”, Small Group Research, 32(4)/2001, pp. 379-405.
[13] Hill, S. N., Offermann, L. R. and Thomas, K. (2018) “Mitigating the Detrimental Impact of Maximum Negative Affect on Team Cohesion and Performance Through Face-to-Face Communication”, Group & Organization Management, 44(1)/2018, pp. 211-238, https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601118776835
[14] Picazo, C., Gamero, N., Zornoza, A. and Peiró, J. M. (2015) “Testing relations between group cohesion and satisfaction in project teams: A cross-level and cross-lagged approach”, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(2)/2015, pp. 297-307, 10.1080/1359432X.2014.894979
[15] Robbins, S. and Judge, T. (2013) Organizational Behaviour, 15th ed. Pearson Education, USA.
[16] Wu, X., Wen, B. and Du, M. (2015) “A Multi-Level Research on the Antecedents and Consequences of Group Task Satisfaction, American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 5(5)/2015, pp. 264-271, 10.4236/ajibm.2015.55028
[17] Chiocchio, F. and Essiembre, H. (2009) “Cohesion and performance: A meta-analytic review of disparities between project teams, production teams, and service teams”, Small Group Research, 40(4)/2009, pp. 382-420, https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496409335103
[18] McShane, S. and Von Glinow, M. (2003) Organizational Behavior, Emerging Realities for the Workplace Revolution, 7th ed, МcGrow-Hill, USA.
[19] Love, L. R. (2018) “Group cohesion: the effect of diversity”, Global journal of management and marketing, 2(1)/2018, pp. 77-87.
[20] Greer, L. L. (2012) “Group Cohesion Then and Now”, Small Group Research, 43(6)/2012, pp. 655-661, https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1046496412461532
[21] Lindsjørn, Y., Bergersen, G. R., Dings, T. and Sjøberg, D. I. K. (2018) “ Teamwork Quality and Team Performance: Exploring Differences Between Small and Large Agile Projects”, in: Garbajosa, J., Wang, X. and Aguiar, A. (Eds.), Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming, Switzerland: Springer, pp. 267–274 (19th International Conference XP 2018, Porto, Portugal, May 21–25).
[22] Rosh, L., Offermann, L. R. and Van Diest, R. (2012) “Too close for comfort? Distinguishing between team intimacy and team cohesion”, Human Resource Management Review, 22(2)/2012, pp. 116-127, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.11.004
[23] Shaw, M. E. (1976) Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, USA.
[24] Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., Paoletti, J., Burke, S. C. and Salas, E. (2018) “Does team communication represent a one-size-fits-all approach? A meta-analysis of team communication and performance, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144 (January)/2018, pp. 145-170, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.001
[25] Mason, C. М. and Griffin, М. A. (2005) “Group Task Satisfaction The Group’s Shared Attitude to its Task and Work Environment”, Group & Organization Management, 30(6)/2005, pp. 625-652, https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601104269522
[26] Judge, T. А. and Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2012) “Job Attitudes“, Annual Review of Psychology, 63/2012, pp. 341–367, doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100511
[27] Schermerhorn, J. Jr., Hunt, J. G. and Osborn, R. N. (2010) Organizational Behavior, 11th ed., John Wiley & Sons, USA.


Share this

Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans – UdEkoM Balkan
179 Ustanicka St, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

https://www.udekom.org.rs/home

Udekom Balkans is a dynamic non-governmental and non-profit organization, established in 2014 with a mission to foster the growth of scientific knowledge within the Balkan region and beyond. Our primary objectives include advancing the fields of management and economics, as well as providing educational resources to our members and the wider public.

Who We Are: Our members include esteemed university professors from various scientific disciplines, postgraduate students, and experts from ministries, public administrations, private and public enterprises, multinational corporations, associations, and similar organizations.

Building Bridges Together: Over the course of nine years since our establishment, the Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans has established impactful partnerships with more than 1,000 diverse institutions across the Balkan region and worldwide.

EMAN conference publications are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.