Voluntary Participative Groups
Introduction
Groups are an integral part of society and can take a variety of different forms. It is
difficult to define a group but it can be considered as ‘two or more people who share a
common definition and evaluation of themselves and behave in accordance with such a
definition’ (Hogg & Vaughan, 2011). An alternative definition of a group is ‘two or more
individuals in face-to-face interaction, each aware of his or her membership in the group,
each aware of the others who belong to the group, and each aware of their positive
independence as they strive to achieve mutual goals’ (Johnson & Johnson, 1987). Critically,
both of these definitions involve the classification of a group as involving the presence of
more than one individual. Two important properties of a group are cohesiveness and
entitativity. Cohesiveness allows the group to bond and form a sense of solidarity between
the members of the group. Entitativity refers to the homogeneity and distinctiveness of the
group. A successful group has a high degree of both cohesiveness and entitativity.
A number of theories have been proposed to explain why individuals seek to become
members of groups. Baumeister & Leary (1995) argued that humans have a basic need to
belong and form stable, continuing bonds with other people. Membership of a group can
subsequently enhance psychological wellbeing through a sense of belonging (Leary, Tambor,
Terdal & Downs, 1995). Inclusivity in a group can lead to high self-esteem as individuals
receive a degree of validation from the other members. In addition, groups can aid goal
achievement as co-operation between members with a mutual goal can result in successful
goal pursuit. In order for a group to function effectively, members can be assigned specific
roles which distinguish between different activities within the group. The attribution of such
roles can aid the group by dividing labour and providing individuals with a meaningful
identity in which to define themselves.
It is clear that there are many benefits of membership within a group and it is
therefore important to explore the place of voluntary participative groups for staff within a
higher education institution. The aim of the present research was to identify voluntary
participative groups available for staff at the University of Sheffield and to identify and
explore areas of good practice within these groups. Voluntary participative groups involve
extra-curricular activities for staff at the university which can be undertaken on a voluntary
basis. The findings from the research can be applied to staff groups at other higher education
institutions in order to promote membership and sustenance of such groups.
Method
An audit was compiled to establish the number of voluntary participative groups for
staff at the University of Sheffield. These included groups organised by Human Resources,
independently run groups and action groups. A web search was used to find information
about voluntary participative groups for staff within the university. The procedure was
conducted using the Google search engine and involved a number of searches, with a variety
of key words. The key words included 'staff', 'activities', 'music', 'sport' and 'groups' and were
refined to only include information relating to the University of Sheffield. A total of eleven
groups were identified from the web search. These were the cricket club, the book club, two
different football leagues, the cycle forum, the staff wellbeing group, the LGBT staff
network, the choir, bootcamp, the women’s club and the physics and astronomy art group. It
therefore appeared that there are relatively few voluntary participative groups for staff to be
involved with at the university.
Participants were members of staff at the University of Sheffield. They were sent an
email, outlining the main aim of the research and asking if they would be willing to attend an
interview to discuss their respective groups. Initial interviews were conducted with the
leaders of the staff book club, the cycle forum, the LGBT staff network and the staff cricket
club. The questions related to membership, activities, formation, areas of good practice and
personal information about each participant (see appendix 1 for the interview questions).
Subsequent interviews were then held with other members of the groups and
recommendations of willing participants were given by the leaders of the groups. Additional
interviews were conducted with a member from the cycle forum, cricket club and LGBT staff
network. Two further email interviews took place with members of the LGBT staff network.
The project received ethical approval from the Psychology Department ethics
committee. All participants provided informed consent and interviews were recorded, with
the participants’ permission.
Book Club
The book club is a group that is organised by HR through a facility called Juice. HR
initiated Juice in order to promote everyday health and wellbeing for staff at the university.
Juice organises a number of different activities for staff such as relaxation, bouldering, yoga
and boot camp and therefore provides a resource for staff to identify and attend activities of
interest. These groups are primarily organised and advertised via Juice, as opposed to
individual members.
The book club has a distribution list of 20-25 members, with between 6 and 10 core
members. It is therefore a relatively small group of avid readers. Members of the group are
not aware of the staff roles of other members and this provides a degree of anonymity within
the group. This means that the group is successful in avoiding barriers between staff from
different areas of the university. Staff can join the group through the Juice website. The group
was originally organised by the Women’s network but numbers were decreasing. A key
limitation of the Women’s network was a gender restriction. This issue is overcome by the
use of Juice. However, staff must be aware of Juice in order to join the book club.
The main activity of the book club is to discuss a designated book at each meeting.
The group meet once a month and members discuss a different book at each meeting. The
book club has an organiser whose role is to send emails, organise dates and book rooms for
meetings. Prior to each meeting, a leader is designated to run a session relating to a particular
book. This means that there are different leaders at each of the meetings. There is no
hierarchy of members and this means that other members do not have a role within the group.
Roles can help members to have a sense of identity and it could therefore be beneficial to
divide the labour between different members of the group.
The group works well as there are a core group of members who are enthusiastic
about books and who enjoy reading the books and attending the sessions. However, the group
could be more effective with increased staff participation. Currently, meetings are held at
lunchtimes but it is often difficult for staff to attend every session due to other commitments.
It is clear that the book club provides a number of benefits for staff and it is important for
members to feel that they are able to attend the sessions.
A key limitation of both the book club and Juice is a lack of advertisement. Members
of staff have a perception of Juice as only organising boot camps. This means that staff with
an interest in books will not necessarily use Juice to find a book club. Consequently, it is
essential for Juice to broaden its awareness amongst staff in order to convey the variety of
activities that it organises. In addition, Juice could support groups such as the book club by
advertising the activities through websites such as Facebook and Twitter.
Cricket Club
The staff cricket club has approximately 60 playing members, 165 Facebook
members and 130 people on the mailing list. The group is fairly well known around the
university and has the highest membership of the four groups investigated as part of this
research. The club is comprised of both staff and students and a significant proportion of the
members are international students. The diversity of membership within the club provides a
sense of solidarity between individuals from various aspects of the university.
The club is comprised of four teams which play in different leagues across the
midlands. The teams meet on a weekly basis to play cricket and have infrequent socials
throughout the year. Socials provide an opportunity for individuals with a common interest to
meet with like-minded people and can therefore help to improve working relations between
members of staff. One of the participants stated that the group has a very good social
atmosphere and is very inclusive.
In terms of formation, the club has a management committee with a number of
different roles including club captain, fixtures secretary and an international students’
representative. The presence of a committee ensures that labour is divided evenly amongst
the members of the committee. In addition, the committee can make informed decisions
about the club with the chair making all of the final decisions. The group has a democratic
system of electing committee members within an annual general meeting (AGM). At the
AGM, new roles can be introduced if there is a need for a new role within the committee. The
hierarchical structure of the group allows the organisation of the group to be efficient but
relies upon dedication and commitment from key members of the group.
The group works well in terms of the diversity of members and good ethnic and
female representation. The club encourages good relationships between members which can
be utilised in a working environment. Once again, the group identifies publicity as an issue
which could be improved with help and resources from the university. In addition, investment
in sports facilities would help to improve the club.
Cycle Forum
The cycle forum has approximately 100 people on the mailing list and about 12
members who regularly attend meetings. This core group of members is comprised of staff
from different parts of the university and therefore provides representation for a number of
different faculties. Approximately half of the members are students and the group try to
ensure that one of the Union Officers is present at each meeting in order to provide a valid
representative for students. In this respect, the group works well in terms of integrating the
views of both staff and students. The main source of advertisement for the group is their
website.
The group meets three times a year. The main aim of the cycle forum is to
disseminate information about what the university is doing in terms of cyclists. Members of
the group are keen cyclists who are interested in maintaining and improving cycling facilities
for both staff and students at the university. The cycle forum collects complaints and
suggestions which can then be addressed by the estates and facilities management. In
addition, the group speak to the council about the cycling environment around the university.
Each meeting has an agenda with action points and minutes. This role is undertaken
by the chair so there is little distribution of labour between members of the group as there are
no other specified roles. The chair manages the group, arranges the meetings, ensures that the
group stick to the agenda and aims to increase participation at meetings. The cycle forum has
no administration role so inclusion of other roles within the group would help to improve the
efficiency of the group and its members.
The group works well in terms of involving a group of like-minded people who are
passionate about cycling and the facilities accessible to staff and students at the university.
However, the group has a limited amount of resources and would therefore benefit from
support from the university. This would enable more projects to be organised and run by the
group.
LGBT Staff Network
The LGBT staff network has approximately 50 members with an almost even
distribution of academic staff and professional services staff. Initially, staff can join the group
by providing their email address. Staff will then be invited to join closed Facebook and
Google groups. The group is primarily advertised through HR and social media.
The LGBT staff network is involved in a number of different activities. These
include, formal meetings, social events, lectures and film screenings. Another important
function of the group is to advise management and HR about issues relating to LGBT and
any action that could be taken on the university campus. Formal meetings are held four times
a year but the group also meet at other events throughout the year.
The chairperson manages the group and organises and initiates events. Since 2010,
the group have implemented other roles such as a vice chair so that decisions can be made
collaboratively between various key members of the group. Having specific roles provides
members with a sense of identity and allows tasks to be distributed evenly amongst different
members. Once again, the dedication and commitment of the chairperson is critical in the
success of this group.
Membership of the group is voluntary so the success of the group depends on
commitment from members. In order for the group to work effectively, members must invest
time into organising events but this is often difficult as a commitment to work takes
precedence over extra-curricular activities. The university could help to support groups by
providing clear information about the availability of resources for staff groups. Currently, the
group works well in encouraging good relations between members of staff from different
parts of the university and provides a sense of community for members.
Discussion
In terms of methodology, it was difficult to find many groups in the initial stage of the
research. This suggests that there are few groups for staff to join within the university.
However, if there are more groups, the fact that it was not easy to find them highlights the
problems for staff in being aware of and joining such groups. Once again, this means that
advertising is critical in improving membership within groups. In addition, members of staff
may search for groups in which they have a pre-existing interest but this does not provide an
opportunity for exploring novel activities. In this respect, the groups currently rely on
individuals seeking out new information, as opposed to promoting information across all
members of staff. Most of the participants took a while to respond to the email inviting them
to an interview but once an initial response was ascertained, it was then relatively easy to
book and conduct interviews with the participants.
All of the participants were asked whether their respective groups work well. This
question was primarily based on how well the group functions and whether the groups works
well in establishing good relations between members. Criteria for this question were therefore
very subjective and were based on the individual opinion of each participant. Future research
could consider more objective measures of how groups work well in order to make a more
reasonable judgment of this issue.
A limitation of the present study is that it only focuses on one higher education
institution. It is therefore difficult to establish whether the university is adopting good
practice in terms of voluntary participative groups for staff as no comparison can be made
with other institutions. In addition, the present study did not explore perceptions of groups
help by staff who are not members of a group. It is therefore difficult to determine whether
there is a demand for voluntary participative groups within the university.
The groups included in the present study were very diverse, especially in terms of the
aims of the groups. These included hobbies such as reading and playing cricket, being part of
an LGBT community and action groups involving cycling policy within the city. However, a
common feature of all members of the different groups is that they have a keen interest in
their respective activities. This is extremely important in the success of any group and is
fundamental to ensuring that the group is sustainable.
All of the groups interviewed as part of the research were organised and led by
professional services staff. This suggests that within the groups, the leadership role is adopted
by a member who has pre-existing transferable skills which can be used in order to maintain
and manage the group. Consequently, voluntary participative groups provide an opportunity
for staff to expand their skills in a non-work environment. However, there were issues in
some of the groups in terms of distribution of workload and structure. The university could
help groups to implement a more hierarchical structure in order to improve the efficiency of
voluntary participative groups. All of the groups seemed to have a reasonable number of both
academic staff and professional services staff.
Most of the participants identified lack of money as a key constraint of their
respective groups. Although HR provides some financial support for voluntary participative
groups, more money would clearly benefit these groups. However, groups could also explore
other avenues of financial support such as sponsorship from external organisations. Many of
the student groups at the university are sponsored by external organisations so this could also
be implemented by staff groups.
The participants involved in staff groups were all asked about their awareness of other
staff groups as part of their interviews. Interestingly, most of the participants were unaware
of staff groups other than their own. Many participants were convinced that there were
groups for staff but struggled to name any. This highlights the importance of implementing a
database or formal list of all of the voluntary participative groups at the university which can
be made accessible to all members of staff. This would take relatively little time to compile
but would be extremely effective in increasing awareness and participation. In addition, one
participant suggested that all groups were titled ‘The University of Sheffield staff…’ in order
to make it easier to identify groups for staff.
Recommendations
The students’ union at the University of Sheffield has been rated the best students'
union in the UK in the Times Higher Education's Student Experience Survey for the past
three years. The union invests a considerable amount of time and money into the promotion
and organisation of clubs and societies for students through events such as the freshers fair
and the ‘give it a go’ scheme. Despite the enthusiasm for student groups, the university does
not offer similar schemes for staff and the number of groups available for staff is extremely
limited. It is suggested that HR could organise similar events for staff in order to improve
ease of access to voluntary participative groups at the university. However, in order to be
successful, HR would need to invest both time and money. Currently, it is the passion of both
the leaders and the members of the groups which sustain the success of these groups within
the university.
Appendix 1: Interview Questions
Membership:
How many members are there in the group?
Is there any data on what staff roles the participants have? If so, can that be shared with us?
How can staff join the group? What is the mode of membership?
Is membership managed? Can people simply come and go as they please?
How can people find out about the group?
Does it include students? If so, how many?
Activities:
What does the group do?
How often does the group meet?
Are events structured?
If so, how? In what way?
Formation:
Please would you describe how the group is managed.
Is there a hierarchy of members?
Do members have specific roles?
Do those roles change? If so, how and when?
Areas of good practice:
How does the group work?
Do you think it works well?
Are there any improvements you might make?
Are there ways the University might support you better?
Do you think the group encourages a better relationship between individuals?
If so, in what way?
About you:
Why did you join the group?
How did you find out about it?
Do you see any group members outside the group setting?
If so, is this ever in a formal working environment?
Do you meet socially?
How do you feel about this?
Are you aware of other groups?
References
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological bulletin, 117(3), 497529.
Hogg, M. A., & Vaughan, G. M. (2011). Social Psychology (6th Edition). Essex: Pearson
Education Limited.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, F. P. (1987). Joining together: Group theory and group skills
(3rd Edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an
interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 68(3), 518.