Effective social groups are constrained to an optimal intermediate size.
Evidence
The theorem can be seen in application politically in parties, trade unions or factories. It is also possible to see how each social group has its own law of fixed proportions, which varies according to the level of its culture, independence of mind, spirit of initiative and sense of responsibility, and according to the degree of discipline of its most backward and peripheral members. — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 784 (
#complicates, via linked claim)
The negative character of the bond that unifies the large group is revealed, above all, in its norms. It should be remembered that obligatory rules of every sort must be the simpler and the less voluminous (other things being equal), the larger the sphere of their application. There are much fewer rules of international courtesy, for instance, than there are courtesy rules which have to be observed within every smaller circle; or, the larger the states of the German Reich, the briefer, usually, are their constitutions. — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 9462 (
#complicates, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Societal tasks should be handled by the smallest capable group — Laura Albareda and Alejo Jose G. Sison, Commons Organizing: Embedding Common…, 88; Mixed individuals may recategorize into broader minoritized superordinate groups. — Anna X. Huang, Jacqueline M. Chen, and Juliane Degner, Being One or the Other, Both or…, 47; A narrow dedicated group can outweigh an apathetic electorate (+12 more)
Broader Connections
- Individual preferences for optimal group size can undermine optimal outcomes collectively
#complicates(0.76) - Each social group’s optimal internal structure varies with its members’ culture and discipline.
#complicates(0.72) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 784 - Larger groups require simpler and fewer binding norms
#complicates(0.70) — Georg Simmel, The Sociology of Georg Simmel, 9462