Applications in Historical Contexts
Industrial Organisations and Workplaces
From the factory floors of the early 20th century to the tech campuses of today, theories of collective performance have been applied to improve organisational outcomes.
Scientific Management vs. Human Relations: In the early 1900s, Frederick Taylor’s scientific management mostly treated workers as individual units but by the 1920s-30s, the importance of groups emerged. The Hawthorne Studies (1924–1932) at Western Electric’s Hawthorne plant famously showed that workers are influenced by social factors and attention (the “Hawthorne effect”). When researchers observed workers or changed conditions, productivity often improved not because of the physical changes but because the workers felt watched and valued. More importantly, these studies found that informal workgroup norms heavily influenced individual performance – for instance, groups might set an unofficial “fair day’s work” rate and subtly enforce it among members. This led to the Human Relations Movement in management, with Elton Mayo and others advocating for attention to team morale, leadership style and worker satisfaction. By mid-century, many companies began implementing work teams, joint problem-solving committees and other participative structures to harness collective performance.
Rise of Team-Based Work: Post WWII, especially from the 1980s onward, global competition pushed firms to leverage teamwork for quality and innovation. Japanese manufacturers like Toyota pioneered quality circles and just-in-time production, emphasising collective responsibility for continuous improvement. Western firms followed suit with self-managed teams and project-based structures. Theories like Hackman’s and Tuckman’s were used to train managers in building effective teams. For example, a 1990s software company might replace a traditional hierarchical department with agile cross-functional teams – drawing on research that diverse skill sets in a team can solve problems faster when the team has good processes and trust. Case studies from this era (General Electric’s work-out teams, Volvo’s team assembly experiments) often showed higher productivity and worker satisfaction when autonomy and group cohesion were increased. However, these initiatives also revealed challenges: not all groups automatically gel and sometimes poorly implemented team structures led to conflict or diffusion of responsibility.
Contemporary Workplace and Team Science: In modern knowledge industries, collective performance is critical for innovation. Companies like Google have invested in internal studies of teamwork. Google’s Project Aristotle (2012-2015) analysed hundreds of teams and found that factors like psychological safety (a climate where team members feel safe to take risks and speak up) were key differentiators of high-performing teams – echoing earlier academic findings about the importance of trust and open communication (a cognitive/affective team process in IPO terms). Today, concepts like collective intelligence, collaborative leadership and remote team cohesion are actively researched and applied. The COVID-19 pandemic’s shift to remote work in 2020, for instance, tested theories by forcing companies to find ways to maintain collective efficacy and identity via virtual tools.
To summarise, workplaces have evolved from assembly lines of isolated labourers to networked teams where understanding group dynamics is essential. The application of collective performance theories in industry has led to practices like team-building workshops (grounded in social identity and group development theories), performance bonus systems that reward team results (aligning individual incentives with collective goals) and physical office designs that encourage interaction (acknowledging that informal “water-cooler” moments can strengthen cohesion and idea-sharing).
Artistic and Theatrical Performances
The arts, especially theatre and music, have a long history of collective performance, often intuitively understood by practitioners and later analysed by scholars.
Ensemble Theatre: Since ancient Greek chorus performances to Shakespeare’s troupe in Elizabethan England, theatrical productions have required coordination among actors, directors, stage crew and more. In the 20th century, ensemble theatre became a deliberate movement. Pioneers like Konstantin Stanislavski emphasised the importance of the ensemble – the idea that there are no small parts and every actor contributes to a unified performance. This relates to collective efficacy: each cast member’s confidence in the group’s ability to deliver a great show can enhance their individual performance. Dramaturgical discipline (being “in role” and responsive to others) is crucial. The Group Theatre in 1930s America (with Lee Strasberg and Stella Adler) functioned as a tight-knit collective that deeply influenced acting methods and showed how strong group identity (they shared political ideals and a commitment to realism) could produce powerful art.
Collaborative Creation: Beyond traditional theatre, forms like improvisational theatre and contemporary dance rely on intense collective attunement. Keith Johnstone’s improv principles, for example, teach performers to adopt a “yes and” mindset – essentially a collective norm that encourages accepting and building on others’ ideas in real time, which is a clear application of team process and psychological safety (performers must trust that others will support their spontaneous contributions). In dance companies like Alvin Ailey or Pina Bausch’s ensemble, choreographers often co-create pieces with the dancers, drawing on the group’s shared creativity. The success of such performances demonstrates theories of group flow – a concept where a group can enter a synchronised state of heightened creativity, akin to individual flow states, when conditions (skill, trust, open communication) are right.
Music Ensembles: Whether in an orchestra or a jazz band, collective performance is obvious – the output (the music) is literally the combination of all players’ actions. Researchers have studied how orchestras function with a strict hierarchy (the conductor model) versus small group jazz improvisation which is more decentralised. Interestingly, effective performance arises in both cases through slightly different mechanisms: orchestras rely more on formal leadership and clear roles, aligning with the idea that structure and shared mental models (everyone follows the score and conductor) enable precision. Jazz ensembles rely on implicit coordination, where members listen closely and adapt, embodying principles of mutual monitoring and trust. Both require a shared sense of timing and anticipation – essentially a collective cognition about where the piece is going.
Cultural Impact: Theories like dramaturgical analysis have turned back to inform art: e.g., in socially engaged art, performers act out real social roles (political theatre, performance art pieces that involve audience participation) to challenge norms. In the mid-20th century, Augusto Boal’s “Theatre of the Oppressed” used collective improvisational performance as a tool for communities (often illiterate or oppressed groups) to envision and practice social change, blending theatre with collective empowerment. This is an example of collective efficacy applied in an artistic-social context: by acting together in forum theatre, participants build confidence to act together in real life. The enduring popularity of flash mobs (as mentioned earlier) and community choirs shows how collective performance also serves social bonding and identity functions beyond the artistic output itself.
Social Movements and Collective Action
Throughout history, groups of people have come together to push for change – from civil rights and independence movements to labor unions and environmental campaigns. The success and failures of these movements provide real-world laboratories for collective performance theories.
Mobilisation and Organisation: The Resource Mobilisation Theory in the 1970s shifted focus to how movements generate performance through strategic use of resources (Resource mobilization - Wikipedia). For example, the American Civil Rights Movement (1950s-60s) didn’t succeed just on moral urgency; it was effectively organised by groups like the NAACP and SCLC that coordinated protests, legal challenges and fund-raising – essentially high-performing teams spanning cities. Leaders such as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. also consciously built a shared identity and collective efficacy among activists: the rhetoric of brotherhood, freedom now and nonviolent soldiering gave participants a strong sense of “we” and belief they could endure jail or beatings for the cause. Social identity theory explains how the movement forged a new in-group (the community of activists, black and white, fighting segregation) which empowered people who had been socially marginalised.
Collective Identity in Movements: Sociologist Alberto Melucci noted that apart from formal organisation, movements depend on collective identity – the shared definition of a group that derives from common interests, experiences and solidarity. For instance, the feminist movements of the 1970s built an identity around womanhood and sisterhood (“the personal is political”), allowing dispersed individuals to feel part of a global collective striving for gender equality. This shared identity made coordinated performance possible (like simultaneous protests in different countries) without a single hierarchy.
Performance and Protest: The term “collective performance” can also describe how movements use public demonstrations as performances to convey messages. Goffman’s dramaturgy has been applied here: activists stage sit-ins, marches or street theatre to dramatize their plight or demands. One famous example is the Salt March in India (1930) led by Mahatma Gandhi – a 24-day nonviolent procession against the British salt tax, which was highly choreographed in terms of symbolism and media strategy. It was essentially a moral performance to win domestic and international support, relying on the disciplined collective action of thousands. The success of such events depends on participant coordination (everyone knew the plan and stuck to nonviolence, a shared script) and collective courage (a function of collective efficacy – each individual marched because they saw everyone else believing in the cause, overcoming fear).
Case: Polish Solidarity (1980s): The Solidarity movement in communist Poland began in 1980 as a trade union strike in a shipyard and grew into a nationwide movement. Despite operating under an authoritarian regime, Solidarity managed a remarkable collective performance – organising strikes, a robust underground press and eventually roundtable negotiations. This success can be analysed through multiple frameworks: strong social identity (workers, intellectuals and Catholic Church united under Polish national and freedom identity), savvy resource mobilisation (getting material support from the West, utilising church spaces for meetings) and extraordinary collective efficacy (despite crackdowns, people maintained belief in their power to change the system). By 1989, Solidarity’s performance culminated in semi-free elections, a precursor to the fall of communism in Eastern Europe, illustrating how collective performance can indeed shift the course of governance and society.
Modern social movements, like Black Lives Matter or climate strikes by youth, continue to highlight the interplay of these factors. In an age of social media, the “performance” aspect (hashtags, viral videos of protests) and rapid identity formation (“We are the 99%” from Occupy Wall Street) show new dynamics of collective performance. Nonetheless, classic challenges identified by Olson (free-riding, sustaining participation) and classic boosters like identity and efficacy remain highly relevant.
Sports Teams and Group Athletics
Sports provide some of the clearest examples of collective performance, with readily measured outcomes (wins, records) and often colourful case studies of team dynamics.
.
Team Cohesion and Performance: Coaches and sports psychologists have long observed that a united team can outperform a collection of star individuals that don’t gel. For instance, the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team (“Miracle on Ice”), an underdog college-player team, beat the seasoned Soviet team. Many analyses credit their victory to extraordinary team cohesion, belief and clever leadership by Coach Herb Brooks who fostered a strong shared identity (“playing for your country”) and collective efficacy (through rigorous training and smaller victories). Research in sports confirms that collective efficacy is a predictor of team performance over a season (Collective Efficacy and Team Performance: A Longitudinal Study of ...). When players share confidence (“We can do this”), they tend to communicate better on the field, stick to game plans under pressure and cover for each other’s mistakes.
Collective Efficacy Dynamics: A longitudinal study in American football cited on ResearchGate found a reciprocal relationship between collective efficacy and performance – good performance boosts efficacy and high efficacy (especially early in a season) leads to better performance (Collective Efficacy and Team Performance: A Longitudinal Study of ...). This aligns with Bandura’s idea of a feedback loop in motivation. Teams often build collective efficacy through team-building exercises (outward bound training, trust falls. to simulate mastery experiences) and through vicarious experiences (watching film of successful teams, having veteran winners join the team). On the flip side, a few bad losses can shatter a team’s collective efficacy. Good coaches engage in verbal persuasion to keep the team believing in itself after setbacks, which is essentially managing the collective emotion and mindset.
Roles and Coordination: Sports also illustrate the importance of clear roles and complementary skills – a concept from team effectiveness models. In basketball, for example, a mix of roles (scorers, defenders, playmakers) and willingness to sublimate individual glory for team needs (an ego-free, task-focused climate) often distinguishes championship teams. Phil Jackson, who coached the Chicago Bulls and LA Lakers, implemented a philosophy blending mindfulness and group chemistry (even using meditation and principles from martial arts philosophy) to create teams that functioned almost intuitively together. This can be related to the idea of transactive memory and shared mental models; on the court, players need to know each other’s tendencies and trust each other’s decisions quickly. When a play breaks down, a high-performing team can improvise in sync – much like a jazz ensemble – because they have a shared understanding of the game plan and each other’s abilities.
Case: New Zealand All Blacks (Rugby): One of the most successful sports teams in history, the All Blacks (New Zealand’s national rugby team) are often studied for their culture. They place huge emphasis on team ethos, humility and legacy. Their locker-room mantra “No one is bigger than the team” and rituals like the haka (a traditional Māori group war dance performed before matches) forge a powerful social identity and sense of unity. The haka, in particular, is a performance of collective identity that boosts their arousal and intimidates opponents – an interesting blend of cultural performance and sports psychology. The All Blacks also encourage experienced players to mentor younger ones, maintaining continuity and collective confidence year after year. This continuity and tradition can be seen as fostering a long-term collective efficacy – new members quickly buy into “this is how All Blacks win” and believe in it.
From school clubs to professional leagues, sports teams exemplify how leadership, shared goals and group pride translate into results. They also highlight a societal aspect: fans become part of the extended group, illustrating social identity theory on a large scale (e.g., city-wide celebrations when “our team” wins). Successful teams can uplift community pride and even national unity (as seen when underdog national teams perform well in World Cup tournaments, bringing together diverse populations in collective celebration).
Governance and Political Collaboration
Collective performance concepts also apply in governance and innovation in the public sphere. Government cabinets, parliaments and cross-sector coalitions are essentially teams that need to perform.
Cabinet and Committee Dynamics: Political scientists note that effective governance often comes down to how well small groups (cabinets, legislative committees, judiciary panels) work together. For example, a president or prime minister’s cabinet is a team of rivals or allies who must coordinate policy. A high-performing cabinet might be one where there is trust (psychological safety) enough to debate frankly, a strong common vision (like Franklin D. Roosevelt’s War Cabinet in the 1940s rallying around the goal of winning WWII) and clear decision rules to avoid paralysis. Dysfunctional collective performance in governance can lead to crises – for instance, if agencies fail to share information (a cited factor in the intelligence lapses before the 9/11 attacks in the U.S., indicating poor inter-group processes). The concept of “collective responsibility” in parliamentary systems (where the cabinet stands or falls together) is essentially a mechanism to enforce group cohesion and unified performance in public.
Interorganisational Collaboration: Tackling big societal challenges (pandemics, climate change, terrorism) often requires multiple organizations or nations to act collectively. Theories of collective performance inform how international coalitions or public-private partnerships can be made to work. Key factors include establishing a shared identity or mission (e.g., framing climate action as a common human mission), building trust through repeated successful small collaborations (boosting collective efficacy at the alliance level) and formal structures that align incentives (like treaties or joint funding of projects, reflecting resource mobilisation). History provides both successes (the Montreal Protocol for ozone layer protection in 1987, where nations collectively agreed and acted effectively) and failures (the League of Nations’ inability to act against aggressions in the 1930s, often attributed to lack of true collective resolve and commitment).
Innovation and Knowledge Sharing: Societal innovation often arises from collective efforts too, such as research consortia, open-source software communities or cross-disciplinary think tanks. The concept of Team Science has gained attention: recognising that breakthrough innovations (like mapping the human genome or developing the Internet) were not the result of lone geniuses but of well-coordinated teams with diverse expertise. Governments and universities now attempt to foster these through grants that require multi-institutional collaboration. The success of such initiatives often hinges on effective collective performance – clear goals, good communication infrastructure, trust among participating scientists and leadership to navigate conflicts. For example, the rapid development of COVID-19 vaccines in 2020 was a result of unprecedented global collaboration – scientists, pharmaceutical companies and governments formed teams that shared data and resources. The collective identity (“we are all against the virus”) and urgency helped override competitive instincts, demonstrating how a strong shared purpose can enhance cooperative performance on a grand scale.
Governance also has a literal performative side: public hearings, diplomatic negotiations and even elections have theatrical elements where displaying unity or resolve can be as important as behind-the-scenes work. Parliaments sometimes engage in rituals of collective performance (like a unanimous standing vote to signal national unity on an issue), which can influence public sentiment and legitimacy. Thus, from local councils to the United Nations, the interplay of substantive group effectiveness and symbolic group performance is key to political success and social progress.
Disclaimer:
Please note that parts of this article was assisted by an Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool. The AI has been used to generate certain content and provide information synthesis. While every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, the AI's contributions are based on its training data and algorithms and should be considered as supplementary information.
Comments
Post a Comment