How the word “us” transforms working in a community

• Émile Durkheim: “Authentic social solidarity does not lie in uniform personal profiles, but in the close and effective cooperation between individuals”.
• According to Robert Putnam, there are two types of relationships between people: ‘bonding capital’ and ‘bridging capital’.
• Integrating the sense of “us” into corporate culture represents a differential value and a decisive competitive advantage.

“If you want to go fast, go alone, but if you want to go far, take somebody with you”, says an African proverb.  The most advanced living organisms do not function in isolation; they operate within a community. Indeed, much of their strength lies in their roots in a group. Wolves, elephants and many other large mammals organise themselves in perfectly organised packs or herds in which there are clearly defined hierarchies, a clear distribution of tasks and a strong sense of belonging to the group, in which the search for the common good acts as the stimulus that guarantees the safety of the group and the survival of its members. In some societies of insects, such as ants or bees, the members of the colony are so closely linked together that they practically lose their individuality. They end up functioning, thinking and acting collectively, as if they were the organs and members of a single body dispersed into small units, independent but interconnected.

The power of the sense of belonging as an emotional force that enables the achievement of astonishing shared objectives is one of the great lessons that biomimicry gives to our theoretically developed human societies. This is particularly difficult to achieve in a popular culture of consumption that has prioritised the individual over group interests for many years.

What am I going to read in this article?

• The power of “us”
• Feeling part of something.
• From music to the business world.

The power of “us”

From disciplines such as sociology or biology, several studies confirm the power of “us” over ”I”. A pioneer in this field was the French sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858-1917), a Professor at the Universities of Bordeaux and the Sorbonne. Durkheim put the individual in society at the centre of his thinking, maintaining that education should aim at achieving the systematic and gradual socialization of the younger generations. His theory of organic solidarity explores the value of interdependence between individuals who have different functions, and he upholds that real social solidarity does not lie in the uniformity of personal profiles but, on the contrary, in close and effective cooperation between individuals of different origins, knowledge and specialities.

In the mid-1990s the North American sociologist and political scientist Robert Putnam developed his theory of social capital, which had a notable impact on his country. According to this vision, there are two types of relationship between people. On the one hand, binding relationships or ‘bonding capital’, established between people who are close to each other such as friends and family, i.e. people who have a lot in common. Then there is ‘bridging capital’, which extends these relationships to acquaintances, neighbours, work colleagues, professional networks, and, in general, to those with whom one has less in common. For Putnam, both types of social capital feed off each other. Therefore, communities or work teams that develop both types exhibit a greater ability to cooperate, are more likely to share knowledge, and support one another better when the going gets tough. This fosters an environment of trust, enhances communication, and reduces levels of tension and stress.

Real social solidarity does not lie in the uniformity of personal profiles but, on the contrary, in close and effective cooperation between individuals of different origins, knowledge and specialities.

Feeling part of a group

Another line of thought that focuses on the advantages of the collective approach is the sense of community of McMillan and Chavis. These authors explore the mechanisms of one of the great motivational drivers of the human race since the beginning of time: the need to feel accepted by the group. According to them, a series of conditions need to be in place for an individual to feel part of a collective. First of all, they should identify with the group and feel accepted by the other members. They also need to feel that they are being listened to and that their opinions are valued and respected. In the next phase, they need to see that the group helps them achieve their individual and collective objectives. Finally, a deeper level refers to common history and shared experiences as an invisible thread that creates solid links and a strong commitment to the organisation and each one of its members.

Reaching this level of identification with a project is not something that emerges spontaneously; an organisational culture that fosters respect and cooperation is required.

The business world is a conducive environment to developing these collective links. Indeed, integrating the sense of “us” into a corporate culture represents a differential value and a decisive competitive advantage for those companies that achieve it. This sense of being on the same wavelength collectively is a cross-cutting element in companies, acting as a kind of glue that boosts individual achievement and multiplies results on a general scale. It also enhances people’s engagement, innovation and business resilience, reduces staff turnover, and increases a company’s capacity to attract talent.

Reaching this level of identification with a project is not something that emerges spontaneously. What is needed to achieve this? An organisational culture that fosters respect and cooperation, inspiring leadership, and a good working atmosphere in which each person can find their space to grow, make a positive contribution and have a clear sense of purpose that is visible and demonstrable through actions. Above all, a company whose workforce has good reason to feel proud of where they work.