Those micro-behaviours that strengthen team cohesion

With a series of small, simple but consistent and very precise behaviours that communicate a sense of psychological security, optimism and cohesion orientation to the rest of the group.

I read about this experiment in a book entitled The Culture Code - The Secrets of Highly Successful Groups, written by Daniel Coyle. And this experiment, along with several other pieces of evidence, would show that one of the key ingredients of well-functioning groups lies not so much in that mix of skills, intelligence, experience and charismatic leadership consistent with the classically understood canons of leadership ability, but rather in the constant exchange between the members of that group of these micro-behaviours fundamentally oriented towards a very clear message: 'This group is a safe place within which we can feel intimately connected'.

Let us give a few examples of these micro-behaviours or even just attitudes and attitudes more typically linked to the sphere of non-verbal language: proximity, eye and physical contact, frequent exchanges of energy or words of support and encouragement, pats on the back, smiles and then constant dialogue between all and equals, few interruptions, lots of questions and lots of listening, laughter, good humour and constant caring between people.

It is surprising for me to realise how an already 'established' and internalised concept, placed before my eyes for the first time in these terms, has taken on a radically different significance.

Moreover, always so placed, this is a pivotal point in reflections on topics such as smart working. Leaving aside the usual stale and silly polarised positions on opposite extremes, this 'chemistry' of the groups should make us reflect, after all, also easily, on the possible reasons for the decreasing rates of engagement increasingly recorded in organisations through surveys.

There is a lot of talk about alleged needs related to the value dimension, flexibility, one's personal mission, etc. What if instead, once again, the explanation was not the simplest of all, just as Occam's Razor teaches us? Occam's Razor, also known as the principle of parsimony, is a methodological principle that suggests choosing the simplest solution among several equally valid solutions to a problem. This principle, formulated by William of Ockham in the 14th century, is the basis of modern scientific thinking.

We are human beings who have evolved through a history that has seen us for millennia engaged in the struggle for survival and with a few certainties, including the certainty that the other is indispensable in order to have a better chance in this struggle. Our propensity for individualism, independence and autonomy only came about very recently and, once again, we have adapted but certainly not neurobiologically evolved in this sense. In other words: our instinct continues to be to seek, sometimes even desperately, those signals of reassurance that come to us from others. They call them belonging cues or implicit behaviours that communicate to us energy exchange, recognition from others and orientation towards a future in which we can continue to rely on those who give us these signals.

Without these strokes (to re-call them in the words of Eric Berne), we are literally dead.

We should also go back to rethinking organisational culture not just as a set of words but as a set of concrete actions that embody the values representative of that culture and constantly witness and demonstrate it to others who, however, must be there, nearby, to physically register those reassuring signals so that they translate into a sense of belonging to the organisation itself and to the community that animates it.

*Partner of Newton S.p.A..