# **The Social Architecture of Cliques: Member Traits, Categorizations, and Group Dynamics**

## **Introduction to the Sociology of Cliques**

The human imperative to establish belonging is one of the most persistent and powerful drivers of social and psychological behavior. From the unstructured playgrounds of early childhood to the highly stratified, bureaucratic environments of modern corporate workplaces, individuals consistently organize themselves into specific, identifiable micro-communities. Among these varied social formations, the "clique" stands as a ubiquitous, highly structured, and often polarizing unit of human organization. In the social sciences, a clique is strictly defined as an exclusive, tightly knit group of individuals—typically ranging from two to twelve members, with an average composition of five or six—who interact with each other more regularly, intensely, and intimately than with others in the same setting1.  
Unlike broader social networks, loose friendship circles, or macro-level crowds, cliques are characterized by rigid internal codes, strictly policed boundaries of inclusion and exclusion, and a remarkably high degree of homophily, which is the sociological tendency for individuals to associate with peers who exhibit similar demographic, behavioral, or ideological traits1. Furthermore, cliques frequently operate upon the principle of propinquity, forming among individuals who share geographic or spatial closeness, whether in a specific school cafeteria, a corporate department, or a senior living facility3.  
Cliques function as protective social shelters that provide members with a profound sense of commonality, security, identity, loyalty, and standing5. However, this intense internal cohesion is frequently and deliberately maintained through the mechanics of external exclusion. By establishing a clear psychological and physical demarcation between "us" and "them," cliques create an environment where social acceptance is entirely predicated on possessing prized credentials, and rejection remains an omnipresent threat for both outsiders and non-conforming insiders5. The study of these formations requires a comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach, bridging developmental sociology, organizational behavior, clinical psychology, and computational network science to fully decode the traits, categorizations, and systemic impacts of cliques across the human lifespan.

## **Theoretical Underpinnings of Group Dynamics**

To understand the specific manifestations and categorizations of cliques, it is essential to ground the analysis in the foundational theories of group dynamics and human social motivation. Kurt Lewin, a seminal figure in social psychology, posited that groups are dynamic, powerful entities capable of exerting profound influence over both individual cognition and broader community structures7. The concept of "group dynamics" refers to the continuous, fluid changes that occur within a group's architecture, bringing about actions and reactions that dictate member behavior7.

### **Group Formation and the Establishment of Norms**

According to Bruce Tuckman's widely utilized developmental framework, all social formations transition through a predictable lifecycle, which is highly applicable to the genesis and dissolution of cliques. The cycle begins with the "Forming" stage, wherein individuals initially aggregate based on shared interests or proximity. This is rapidly followed by the "Storming" phase, characterized by internal jockeying for social placement, dominance, and the establishment of a nascent hierarchy. As the group matures into the "Norming" stage, it establishes rigid behavioral, aesthetic, and ideological rules. Finally, in the "Performing" stage, the clique operates as a cohesive, exclusive unit, executing shared tasks or maintaining social dominance, before eventually "Adjourning" when environmental factors, such as graduation or a change in employment, dissolve the immediate geographic bonds8.  
Within the norming and performing stages, cliques distinguish themselves from standard, healthy friendship groups through an extreme, often coercive adherence to unwritten norms. Group norms supervise members and create an exceptionally strong, lasting bond. Those who wish to remain in good standing must adapt to these rules; failure to conform results in swift social expulsion5. The individual is subjected to immense inclusion pressures, feeling socially restricted by the demand to "appear like us, behave like us, believe like us, keep up with us, possess like us, only socialize with us, and like us best"5.

### **Personality Traits and Attachment Styles**

The psychological drive to join, maintain, or avoid a clique is deeply intertwined with individual personality traits and the attachment styles forged during early childhood development9. Attachment theory posits that the quality of early interactions with primary caregivers dictates an individual's trust in themselves and others during subsequent social interactions9. Individuals with secure attachments generally exhibit robust self-esteem and a baseline trust in others. They are significantly more likely to form healthy, inclusive, reciprocal friendship circles that celebrate individuality, rather than seeking the exclusionary shelter of a clique9.  
Conversely, anxious attachment is characterized by an exasperated need for external approval and a perception of the self as unworthy or inadequate9. Anxiously attached individuals are prime candidates for clique membership, as the rigid, tightly controlled structure provides an artificial sense of security, identity, and importance that they cannot generate internally9. Avoidant attachment, featuring a reliance on the self and a perception of others as inherently untrustworthy, leads to different outcomes9. Avoidant individuals may eschew cliques entirely, becoming social isolates, or they may assume highly controlling leadership roles within a clique to dictate the terms of intimacy and mitigate their discomfort with vulnerability9.  
Furthermore, an individual's disposition across the "Big Five" personality traits significantly influences their interaction with social networks. Extraverts, driven by the sheer enjoyment of social situations and the prospect of influencing peers, are highly motivated to participate in densely connected groups, rarely citing a lack of knowledge or interest as barriers to participation12. Highly agreeable individuals, however, may be demotivated from participating in the aggressive boundary maintenance required by strict cliques, as the prospect of interpersonal conflict induces anxiety12. Highly conscientious individuals—being meticulous and goal-directed—often view the performative socialization of cliques as an inefficient use of time, unless the clique serves a direct, instrumental purpose in achieving a tangible goal, such as professional advancement12.

### **Resource Control Theory**

Beyond mere belonging, clique participation is frequently driven by the pursuit of social dominance. Resource Control Theory suggests that humans use a variety of behavioral strategies to control resources and attain elevated status within a peer group13. In the context of a clique, resources may be tangible, such as a special toy on a playground or a premium project assignment in an office, or intangible, such as popularity, romantic access, or protection from harassment13. Dominant clique members frequently utilize "bistrategic" bids—a sophisticated hybrid of prosocial charm and aggressive coercion—to maintain resource control and enforce the group's hierarchy13. Research indicates that bistrategic bids uniquely advantage central members of cliques, allowing them to extract compliance and acquiescence from peripheral members through a mitigated application of force13.

## **Structural and Mathematical Categorizations: Social Network Analysis**

To move beyond qualitative descriptions, researchers employ Social Network Analysis (SNA) to mathematically categorize clique structures and the roles individuals play within them. SNA utilizes graph theory to map the complex interplay of relationships, where individuals or entities are represented as "nodes," and the interactions or relationships between them are represented as "edges"16. The historical foundations of SNA date back to Leonhard Euler's resolution of the Seven Bridges of Königsberg and later advanced in 1934 when Jacob Moreno introduced the "sociogram" to map the social ties of schoolchildren, effectively launching the field of network visualization17.  
In formal SNA, a clique is identified as a subgraph in which every node is directly connected to every other node, representing the maximum possible density3. Because perfect mathematical cliques are rare in large empirical networks, researchers often look for highly dense clusters exhibiting a high "clustering coefficient"—a metric indicating the degree to which nodes tend to cluster together and the likelihood that two associates of a given node are themselves associates3.

### **The Core-Periphery Architecture**

Advanced SNA reveals that cliques frequently exhibit a "core-periphery" macro-structure. This architecture entails a densely connected core of high-status nodes surrounded by a sparsely connected periphery of lower-status nodes19. The defining characteristic of a core node is that it is well-connected not only to other core members but also to the peripheral members, positioning the core as highly "central" to the network's flow of information and influence19. Peripheral nodes, in contrast, maintain ties to the core but remain largely disconnected from one another, reflecting their reliance on the core for social validation and access to network resources19.  
Recent advancements in computing core-periphery structures utilize hypergraphs and random walker algorithms. By calculating the persistence probability of a random walker within a network, researchers can generate a core-periphery profile that accurately quantifies how close each node is to the absolute core, revealing the hidden topological portraits of both social and biological networks21.

### **Network Roles and Bridging Ties**

Through the calculation of various centrality metrics—such as degree centrality (total direct connections), closeness centrality (the speed at which a node can access the entire network), and betweenness centrality (control over the flow of information)—SNA categorizes specific operational roles that govern how cliques interact with the broader social ecosystem3.

| Network Role | Structural Definition | Social Function and Mechanism |
| :---- | :---- | :---- |
| **The Isolate** | A node with zero or exceptionally few edges connecting them to the broader network. | Individuals completely detached from clique dynamics. Often the targets of clique aggression, or highly introverted individuals who actively avoid the network's social hierarchy16. |
| **The Bridge** | An edge or an individual whose "weak ties" provide the only link between two otherwise disconnected clusters. | Fills a "structural hole" (a concept developed by sociologist Ronald Burt). The Bridge exploits this position for competitive advantage, facilitating the flow of novel information between insular cliques3. |
| **The Liaison** | A node that connects two different cliques but technically belongs to neither category. | Functions as a social diplomat. Liaisons maintain high betweenness centrality, allowing them to coordinate interactions across disparate social boundaries without being bound by strict clique conformity25. |
| **The Gatekeeper** | A directed role where a node receives information from a different category and selectively transmits it into their own clique. | Controls the influx of resources and external narratives. Gatekeepers hold immense power within their own clique by determining what outside information is deemed relevant or acceptable16. |
| **The Representative** | A directed role where a node takes information or resources from within their own clique and transmits it outward to a different category. | Acts as the public face or ambassador of the clique. In non-directed relationships, the distinction between Gatekeeper and Representative collapses, as the flow of connection is reciprocal25. |
| **The Coordinator** | A node that connects multiple other nodes that all belong to the exact same category or clique. | The internal glue of the clique. Coordinators maintain high degree centrality within the cluster, ensuring that peripheral members remain tied to the group's central operations25. |

The importance of weak ties within this framework cannot be overstated. Sociologist Mark Granovetter's "Strength of Weak Ties" theory postulates that weak connections (such as casual acquaintances) provide more novel information and resources than strong ties (such as insular clique members)17. Because strong ties share the same information pool, a clique can easily become an echo chamber; it is the weak ties bridging different cliques that allow innovation, opinions, and resources to spread across the broader social landscape17.

## **Developmental Categorization: Cliques vs. Crowds**

In developmental psychology and adolescent sociology, a vital taxonomic distinction must be made between "cliques" and "crowds." While these terms are frequently conflated in colloquial usage, they describe fundamentally different mechanisms of social organization1.

### **The Nature of the Crowd**

A crowd is a large, macro-level, and loosely organized social category defined entirely by shared image, reputation, and stereotypic identity2. Membership in a crowd is often externally imposed by the broader peer system rather than actively chosen through social interaction29. An adolescent may be universally recognized as belonging to the "Nerd" or "Jock" crowd by their peers, even if they do not personally know or interact with the other members of that crowd27.  
Crowds emerge most prominently during the transition to middle school and high school, functioning as a cognitive heuristic that helps young people navigate the overwhelming anonymity and intimidation of large secondary educational environments1. They provide identity prototypes against which adolescents can measure themselves, reflecting the specific social status accorded to various identities by the local peer system27. A single individual may belong to multiple crowds simultaneously if their multifaceted image satisfies the criteria of overlapping stereotypes27.  
To quantify the prevalence of these reputation-based crowds, a comprehensive YouGov survey of 45,000 Americans documented the most recognizable typologies across generations. This data highlights the macro-ecosystems wherein smaller, specialized cliques inevitably form33.

| Crowd / Identity Stereotype | Core Characteristics and Social Perception | Reported Presence (General Adult Population) |
| :---- | :---- | :---- |
| **Jocks / Athletes** | Valued for physical prowess and athletic ability. Highly visible due to institutional sports culture. Often default to high affiliative popularity but are simultaneously stereotyped as aggressive33. | 50%33 |
| **The Populars** | Charismatic, highly visible, and socially intelligent. Emerge heavily in student government and pep rallies. Often secure their status through broad, superficial social networks rather than specialized activities33. | 49%33 |
| **Cheerleaders** | Highly organized, performative group closely aligned with the Jock crowd. Historically dominant in social hierarchies, though their prevalence has shifted generationally (reported by 57% of adults over 45, but only 30% of younger adults)33. | 45%33 |
| **Nerds / Brains** | Associated with academic success, technological proficiency, and intellectual hobbies. Historically marginalized targets of bullying, though the cultural capital of "nerdiness" has increased significantly in the 21st century33. | 38%33 |
| **Stoners / Burnouts** | Defined by recreational drug use and a rejection of institutional academic norms. Hold a niche form of social power related to substance procurement, though this popularity is rarely stable or widely respected33. | 32%33 |
| **Theater / Artsy Kids** | Expressive, creative, and highly involved in the performing arts. Generally noted for being more inclusive and less rigidly hierarchical than athletic or popular crowds33. | 20%33 |

### **The Nature of the Clique within the Crowd**

While the crowd dictates reputation, the clique dictates actual social reality. A clique is a small, interaction-based group defined by intimate sharing, strong emotional attachment, and frequent, exclusive association1. A clique is built upon the dual mechanisms of "selection" (individuals seeking friends with shared interests) and "socialization" (individuals molding their behaviors to match the group through constant exposure)1.  
Cliques frequently nest within crowds35. For example, a high school may possess a macro-crowd of fifty "Theater Kids," but within that crowd, there exists an exclusive clique of six specific actors who dictate casting rumors, monopolize the director's attention, and actively exclude other theater students from their weekend social gatherings1.  
The psychological impact of these structures is profound. Research demonstrates that affiliation with high-status crowds is generally correlated with higher self-esteem and lower levels of internalizing symptoms32. However, this phenomenon is complicated by the "smoke in the looking glass" effect: adolescents frequently exhibit discordance between their self-rated crowd affiliation and their peer-rated crowd affiliation32. An individual categorized by peers into a low-status crowd may psychologically shield themselves by asserting membership in a higher-status group. Conversely, individuals objectively placed in high-status crowds may disavow that affiliation to alleviate the intense anxiety and inclusion pressures generated by elite cliques27.

## **Internal Stratification: Specific Member Roles and Psychological Traits**

When viewed from the exterior, a clique often projects a monolithic facade of homogenous identity. However, internal sociological observation reveals a highly stratified microcosm. Peer groups are strictly organized, featuring distinct operational roles that dictate an individual's daily experience of power, domination, and self-worth24.  
Researchers such as Rosalind Wiseman, Patricia Adler, and Peter Adler have conducted exhaustive ethnographic studies mapping these specific roles. While much of this foundational literature focused specifically on female preadolescent and adolescent dynamics, the psychological archetypes identified serve as a universal blueprint applicable across genders, age groups, and organizational environments37.

### **The Leadership Core**

The apex of the clique is occupied by the individuals who unilaterally control the group's boundaries, enforce its aesthetic and behavioral norms, and wield the highest degree of social capital.  
**The Queen Bee / Leader:** The leader is the focal point of the clique, characterized by an intoxicating blend of charisma, forcefulness, and high social intelligence38. The Leader dictates membership and sets the trends that others are obligated to follow. To maintain their elite position, the Leader engages in a sophisticated cycle of psychological manipulation, randomly building up the status of their followers through strategic affection ("anointing" them as special), and subsequently diminishing them through sudden exclusion or coldness38. This unpredictability keeps subordinates perpetually off-balance, dependent, and eager to please40. While Leaders project an aura of supreme confidence and are rarely intimidated by peers or adult authority figures, clinical psychology suggests that this tyrannical control frequently masks deep-seated insecurities regarding their own intrinsic worth and social survivability10.  
**The Sidekick:** Operating directly adjacent to the Leader is the Sidekick, the second-in-command and closest confidant38. Together, the Leader and the Sidekick project an impenetrable, united front38. However, the Sidekick's social power is entirely derivative, dependent upon the proxy confidence bestowed by the Leader38. Because their status is precarious, the Sidekick is highly motivated to prove their loyalty, frequently operating as the primary enforcer of the group's bullying or exclusionary tactics38. Interestingly, research indicates a profound duality in the Sidekick's personality: if structurally separated from the Leader, the Sidekick can rapidly alter their behavior for the better, suggesting that their cruelty is largely a performative survival mechanism38. Yet, if the opportunity arises, an ambitious Sidekick is the most likely member to stage a social coup and usurp the Leader's position38.

### **The Information Brokers**

Within a closed social system, knowledge is the primary currency. Certain clique members specialize entirely in the acquisition, storage, and deployment of social information.  
**The Banker:** The Banker operates stealthily, avoiding the limelight and the overt cruelty associated with the Leader39. This individual acts as the repository for the clique's intelligence, collecting secrets, gossip, and "dirt" from both inside and outside the group39. The Banker gains trust by presenting a facade of innocent, empathetic listening. However, they are highly strategic, withdrawing and weaponizing this deposited information for their own benefit when the social terrain shifts39. Because they do not engage in loud conflicts, they are rarely targeted for retribution.  
**The Messenger:** Functionally similar to the SNA concept of the "Liaison," the Messenger operates between different factions within the clique or between the clique and rival groups37. When the Leader refuses to speak directly to a marginalized member or a target, the Messenger is deployed to handle the communication. They are instrumental in the mechanics of relational aggression, delivering rumors, ultimatums, or news of social exclusion37.

### **The Subordinates and the Periphery**

The structural stability of the clique relies upon a foundational layer of individuals who endure psychological distress in exchange for the protective umbrella of group membership.  
**The Torn Bystander:** This member possesses a fully functioning moral compass and recognizes the cruelty of the clique's actions, yet lacks the self-confidence and assertiveness to challenge the Leader39. The Torn Bystander lives in a state of perpetual cognitive dissonance, conflicted between doing the right thing and remaining loyal to the group39. They frequently engage in covert diplomacy, privately apologizing to the targets of the clique's aggression in an attempt to mitigate the damage, all while terrified that the Leader will discover their treasonous empathy37.  
**The Pleaser / Wannabe:** The Wannabe resides on the absolute, precarious periphery of the clique. This individual desires nothing more than full, secure entry into the inner circle and will compromise their values entirely to gain the Leader's approval38. Wannabes are easily manipulated into doing the clique's "dirty work," acting as pawns in larger social maneuvers39. Adler and Adler noted that Wannabes frequently engage in extreme mimicry, copying the high-risk or aggressive behaviors of the popular core as a desperate means of upward mobility14. However, because the Wannabe lacks the established social capital that protects core members from negative repercussions, they are frequently caught and punished, facing higher rates of peer victimization than the core members they emulate14.  
**The Target:** The Target is the unfortunate focal point of the clique's exclusionary tactics. Sometimes the Target is an complete outsider chosen for their differences; other times, they are a former clique member who has fallen out of favor10. The existence of a Target is sociologically necessary for a toxic clique to function. Shared animosity toward a common enemy fosters intense internal group cohesion and distracts members from the oppressive nature of their own group's rules10. By systematically dehumanizing someone who looks, acts, or believes differently, the clique continuously re-validates the illusion of its own exclusivity and superiority10.  
**The Champion / Floater:** Often overlapping with the "Good-Ats" in crowd sociology (students who excel at multiple, diverse activities), the Floater possesses the unique social agility to associate with multiple groups without being strictly bound by the tyrannical rules of any single clique34. The Floater is highly respected across the social spectrum because their popularity is not predicated on meanness. Crucially, if required, the Floater possesses the requisite social capital and independent confidence to openly challenge the Queen Bee or Leader without fearing total social annihilation39.

## **Behavioral Mechanics: Aggression, Inclusion, and the Basking Effect**

The maintenance of a clique requires exhausting, continuous social labor. Because the group is defined by its exclusivity, its boundaries must be constantly policed and defended5. This boundary maintenance heavily relies on specific behavioral strategies, including the modulation of peer pressure, ingratiation tactics, and complex applications of aggression.

### **The Application of Relational vs. Overt Aggression**

Aggressive behavior in peer groups is not merely an expression of anger; it is a calculated utility used to attain, maintain, or challenge social dominance14.  
Overt aggression involves direct physical or verbal confrontation, such as shoving, hitting, or explicit threatening. While historically associated more heavily with male groups, it is present across demographics as a raw, undeniable display of physical dominance14.  
Relational aggression (also known as social or indirect aggression) is fundamentally different. What discriminates relational aggression is that the damage is specifically focused on destroying a target's relationships, reputation, and social standing43. Tactics include spreading malicious rumors, orchestrating public humiliation, giving the "cold shoulder," and intentional, highly visible exclusion10. Both empirical science and popular culture consistently note that relational aggression is a hallmark of toxic clique dynamics—particularly among females—because it requires a sophisticated level of social insight and intelligence to execute effectively43. A relationally aggressive leader knows exactly which social threads to pull to completely unravel a target's support system.

### **The Moderating Role of Status Structure on Aggression**

A highly nuanced dimension of clique dynamics is how the internal *shape* of the group's hierarchy dictates the level of aggression required by its members. Research demonstrates that status differences within cliques profoundly influence behavior, leading sociologists to categorize groups by their level of "hierarchization" (the standard deviation of status scores) and their "status structure" (the geometric shape of the status distribution)45.

1. **The Pyramid Structure (High Stratification)**: In a traditional top-down hierarchy, one or two central individuals hold immense, unquestioned social power, while a large base of members occupies uniformly low-status positions45. Paradoxically, in these highly stratified cliques, central members do not necessarily need to exert constant, forceful aggressive behavior to control resources. Their dominance is so deeply entrenched that peripheral members acquiesce naturally, requiring only minimal bistrategic prompting13. However, the individuals trapped at the absolute bottom of this pyramid remain highly vulnerable victims45.  
2. **The Inverted Pyramid and Egalitarian Structures (Low Stratification)**: An entirely different dynamic emerges in egalitarian cliques or an "inverted pyramid"—where many members possess high status and very few are relegated to low status45. Because social status is a scarce, positional good, competition in these environments is fiercely intense45. Members are acutely aware of the numerous peers who possess the capital to usurp their position. Consequently, empirical findings show that the relationship between an individual's social status and their aggressive behavior is significantly *stronger* in inverted-pyramid cliques. In a crowded field of equals, members must continuously and aggressively display their dominance to prevent being socially demoted45.

### **"Basking in Reflected Glory"**

To understand why peripheral members willingly endure the anxiety and potential abuse of clique membership, researchers examine the phenomenon of "basking in reflected glory." Affiliating with high-status, popular peers is a strategy used to extract two distinct perceived benefits: *status benefits* (an objective boost to one's own hierarchical ranking) and *affection benefits* (a subjective desire to be liked by the broader community)47.  
The affiliation continuum includes four distinct levels: the "Best Friend," the "Respected Peer," the "Wannabe," and the "Unrelated"47. Research demonstrates a strict linear increase in status benefits; the closer an individual physically and socially gets to the popular core (moving from Wannabe to Best Friend), the higher their own perceived popularity rises47.  
However, affection benefits operate on a curvilinear trajectory. While a moderate association with the popular core (the Respected Peer) increases an individual's general likability across the broader community, moving too close to the center reverses this effect47. The "Best Friends" of a highly dominant clique leader are often liked *less* by the broader peer network than those who maintain a respectful but distant affiliation. This occurs because the intense exclusivity, snobbery, and relational aggression required to maintain the absolute core breeds deep resentment among the general population5.

## **Methodologies of Inclusion and Exclusion**

Adler and Adler's intensive ethnographic studies of preadolescent children (paralleling their methodological typologies of researcher immersion—Peripheral, Active, and Complete membership) highlight the specific mechanical processes by which cliques manage their borders46.  
The lifecycle of clique membership is tightly controlled through practices of recruitment and application. The core leaders actively recruit individuals who can elevate the group's "coolness" factor, while peripheral Wannabes continuously submit implicit applications for entry by mimicking the group's behaviors10. To survive inside, members engage in constant *ingratiation*, utilizing low-risk tactics such as imitating the leader's aesthetic choices or volunteering to execute exclusionary tasks to curry favor48.  
When the internal equilibrium is threatened, the clique engages in *friendship realignment*. The Queen Bee may suddenly decide that a long-standing member is now obsolete or threatening, orchestrating a rapid, coordinated excommunication37. The ousted member experiences complete social isolation, serving as a terrifying cautionary tale that ensures the remaining members double down on their conformity and loyalty10.

## **Contextual Manifestations: From the Playground to the Boardroom**

While the fundamental psychological and structural mechanics of cliques remain remarkably constant, their outward manifestations adapt seamlessly to the specific developmental, environmental, or professional contexts in which they form.

### **Adolescent Ecosystems: The Crucible of Identity**

Adolescence is the epicenter of clique formation and the period where their impacts are most acute. As children transition away from the direct, constant supervision of their parents, the peer network ascends to become the primary context for socialization, identity formulation, and emotional security1.  
During the critical "fit in" stage of psychological development, early adolescents face the overwhelming anonymity and shifting academic structures of large secondary schools1. Cliques provide an immediate, digestible social categorization. In early adolescence, these cliques tend to be strictly segregated by gender. By middle adolescence, high-status clique leaders often begin forging cross-sex friendships or romantic relationships, serving as the catalyst that merges smaller single-sex cliques into larger, mixed-gender networks1.  
The developmental impact of adolescent cliques is a profound double-edged sword. On the positive side, integrating into a healthy, supportive peer group fosters essential social skills, cultivates empathy, and provides vital emotional resilience against the inherent anxieties of puberty26. Conversely, dominant, toxic cliques inflict severe psychological damage. Members trapped inside the clique suffer from oppressive inclusion pressures, constantly monitoring their conduct, dress, and beliefs to avoid fatal missteps5. Furthermore, they may fall victim to "deviant peer contagion," a process by which the clique actively reinforces problematic behaviors—such as substance abuse, risk-taking, or academic delinquency—through shared laughter and social approval30. Outsiders suffer equally from exclusion pressures, leading to profound loneliness, social anxiety, depression, and a shattered sense of self-worth5.  
Fortunately, for the vast majority of individuals, the rigid emphasis on exclusivity ultimately precipitates the clique's undoing. As teenagers transition into late adolescence and early adulthood, they develop a firmer sense of intrinsic identity and require more independent freedom to explore the larger world5. The suffocating conformity demanded by the clique transforms from a protective shelter into an intolerable hindrance. The broader, reputation-based crowds dissolve, and older adolescents naturally shift their priorities toward intimate, reciprocal friendships and romantic partnerships28.

### **Adulthood and the Workplace: The Invisible Walls**

A pervasive societal misconception is that cliques are a strictly juvenile phenomenon that vanishes upon receipt of a high school diploma. In reality, the fundamental human drive for security, familiar affiliation, and resource control merely evolves into more sophisticated, heavily disguised forms in adulthood4. Cliques re-emerge persistently in neighborhoods, social clubs, parenting groups, and, most prominently and destructively, the corporate workplace4.  
Workplace cliques form for reasons strikingly analogous to their teenage counterparts: the pursuit of power, self-preservation, and psychological safety. When employees face systemic uncertainty—such as a fear of corporate downsizing, a pervasive mistrust of executive leadership, or a chronic feeling that their individual contributions are overlooked—they naturally band together to validate their mutual perceptions and defend their professional territory51.  
Melville Dalton’s seminal organizational research identified three distinct types of cliques that employees form to navigate, manipulate, or subvert formal bureaucratic hierarchies52.

| Workplace Clique Type | Composition and Structure | Organizational Function and Motivation |
| :---- | :---- | :---- |
| **Vertical Clique** | Members drawn from the same department but spanning different hierarchical ranks (e.g., a senior director and two specific junior analysts). | Forms to bypass formal bureaucratic red tape, fill gaps in a superior's technical abilities, or provide career protection for subordinates. Cultivates intense, upwardly mobile favoritism52. |
| **Horizontal Clique** | Members of roughly the exact same rank working in the same unit. The most common informal group in any organization. | Forms to provide mutual emotional support, share grievances, and establish defensive coalitions against management directives, such as resisting new productivity quotas52. |
| **Mixed / Random Clique** | Members drawn from entirely different ranks, functional departments, and physical locations. | Forms based on shared external interests, demographics, or proximity outside of formal work (e.g., commuting on the same train). Highly effective at spreading cross-departmental information rapidly52. |

Dalton noted the inherent irony within these structures: members frequently break formal organizational rules to serve the organization's ultimate interests, engaging in "workarounds." An adept manager who successfully utilizes vertical or horizontal cliques to bypass inefficient bureaucracy is often unofficially respected as "strong," while those strictly adhering to the rules are viewed as "weak"53.  
Furthermore, workplace cliques can be classified by their behavioral volatility and leverage toward the organization: *Apathetic groups* are low-skilled, fragmented, and indifferent; *Erratic groups* are inconsistent and easily inflamed; *Strategic groups* are highly united and capable of executing sophisticated pressure tactics against management; and *Conservative groups* consist of highly skilled, self-confident professionals who possess the raw leverage to shut down operations if their demands are ignored54.  
However, what begins as necessary camaraderie or an efficient workaround can rapidly devolve into deeply exclusionary and toxic behavior. The presence of a toxic clique in a professional environment manifests through several observable, damaging symptoms:

* **Exclusive Social Groupings**: Distinct factions constantly take lunches, coffee breaks, or after-work happy hours together, silently signaling that other colleagues are utterly unwelcome55.  
* **Information Gatekeeping**: Clique members deliberately hoard vital operational updates, industry resources, or institutional knowledge, creating artificial hurdles that prevent non-members from performing their jobs effectively55.  
* **Closed-Door Meetings**: Unofficial, exclusionary gatherings where select employees pre-determine decisions before presenting a united, impenetrable front to the rest of the team during formal meetings56.  
* **Favouritism and Resource Allocation**: If a manager is deeply embedded in a Vertical Clique, they invariably assign high-profile projects, public praise, and lucrative promotions exclusively to their inner circle, leaving equally talented outsiders permanently sidelined55.

The organizational fallout of unchecked workplace cliques is severe and multifaceted. They erect invisible walls that fracture company culture and erode team morale55. Employees outside the clique experience diminished engagement, increased isolation, and a profound reluctance to share innovative ideas, fearing immediate dismissal or ridicule by the dominant faction55. The resulting atmosphere of paranoia and mistrust stifles cross-departmental collaboration and directly contributes to elevated employee turnover rates, as disenfranchised talent inevitably seeks employment in more inclusive, meritocratic environments55. Furthermore, ignoring cliques exposes organizations to significant legal and ethical risks; systematic favoritism and exclusion can easily cross the line into actionable workplace discrimination56.  
Mitigating adult cliques requires highly intentional, proactive leadership. Management must first engage in self-reflection to identify whether their own actions, favoritism, or lack of transparency are inadvertently fostering insecurity and driving employees into defensive factions51. Structural solutions include actively diversifying project teams to disrupt entrenched homophily, scheduling inclusive team-building activities, establishing confidential feedback loops, and cultivating an overarching corporate culture where divergent ideas are explicitly rewarded rather than silenced57.

### **The Persistence of Cliques in Senior and Community Living**

The phenomenon of the clique extends even to the final stages of the human lifespan. In adult social circles—such as neighborhood associations, recreational gyms, and senior living communities—clique behavior remains a persistent source of anxiety and exclusion4. Older adults, much like teenagers, harbor a deep-seated need to belong, to walk into a room and be recognized and valued by a familiar group4.  
However, in environments like senior living facilities, this desire for belonging frequently curdles into bullying. New residents often encounter established groups that ruthlessly guard their tables in the dining hall or their seats at the bridge game, explicitly announcing to newcomers that "That seat is taken\!"4. This behavior, observed even among individuals in their late nineties, is driven by the psychological concept of "othering"—perceiving outsiders as fundamentally different and unworthy of inclusion4. In later life, this exclusionary behavior may be exacerbated by the profound losses seniors experience—loss of physical independence, cognitive ability, or long-time spouses. Lashing out at and shunning peers becomes a maladaptive mechanism to reclaim a sense of control and superiority in an otherwise vulnerable stage of life4.  
In broader adult society, female social circles are frequently, and sometimes unfairly, scrutinized for clique-like behavior. The cultural narrative often frames tight-knit groups of adult women—whether in a gymnastics class or a corporate office—as "office gangs" or "mean girls," reflecting a societal expectation that women must cast their friendship nets widely and superficially to accommodate everyone59. While toxic exclusion certainly exists in adult social circles, the demonization of these groups occasionally overlooks the legitimate right of adults to elevate the value of their chosen, intimate social circle over the demand to endlessly befriend strangers49. Nevertheless, when adult exclusivity breeds secrecy, subtle exclusion, and the hoarding of resources, it unequivocally creates a culture of mistrust and resentment49.

## **Conclusion**

The architecture of the clique represents one of the most enduring, complex, and double-sided constructs in human sociology. Born from an evolutionary imperative for psychological protection, social belonging, and resource control, cliques operate as highly sophisticated micro-societies that accompany individuals from the elementary school playground to the corporate boardroom and into the retirement community.  
Whether analyzed through the mathematical precision and topological mapping of Social Network Analysis, the bureaucratic matrices of Melville Dalton's workplace typologies, or the exhaustive developmental ethnographies of Rosalind Wiseman and the Adlers, the underlying mechanics of the clique remain remarkably consistent. A clique is sustained not merely by the shared interests or demographic homophily of its members, but by a rigid, heavily policed hierarchy. This hierarchy invariably comprises controlling leaders who mask deep insecurities with charisma, information-brokering intermediaries who traffic in social currency, and compliant, peripheral subordinates who willingly trade their individual autonomy and moral compass for the intoxicating safety of inclusion.  
The defining mechanism of the clique—its absolute exclusivity—is continuously enforced through the sophisticated application of relational aggression, strict normative compliance, and the perpetual, terrifying threat of social ostracization. While the sheer intensity of clique dynamics peaks during the vulnerable, identity-forming transitions of adolescence, the psychological templates and survival strategies they forge persist indefinitely into adulthood. In the modern workplace and in adult social spheres, the formation of exclusive subgroups continues to dictate the flow of critical information, the allocation of vital resources, and the overall health of communal morale.  
Understanding the diverse traits, psychological motivations, and structural categorizations of cliques is therefore not merely an academic exercise in developmental psychology. It is a vital, functional competency for educators, corporate leaders, and organizational architects who seek to dismantle invisible barriers, mitigate systemic inequalities, and foster genuinely inclusive, collaborative environments across all stages of human life.

#### **Works cited**

1. Adolescent clique \- Wikipedia, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolescent\_clique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolescent_clique)  
2. [https://www.pearson.com/channels/psychology/study-guides/adolescent-peer-and-romantic-relationships-developmental-psychology\#:\~:text=Cliques%3A%20Small%20groups%20(4%E2%80%93,that%20form%20as%20cliques%20combine.](https://www.pearson.com/channels/psychology/study-guides/adolescent-peer-and-romantic-relationships-developmental-psychology#:~:text=Cliques%3A%20Small%20groups%20\(4%E2%80%93,that%20form%20as%20cliques%20combine.)  
3. Social network analysis \- Wikipedia, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social\_network\_analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_network_analysis)  
4. Adult Cliques: A Persistent Problem \- Seniors Guide, [https://www.seniorsguide.com/lifestyle/adult-cliques-a-persistent-problem/](https://www.seniorsguide.com/lifestyle/adult-cliques-a-persistent-problem/)  
5. Adolescence and the Power of Social Cliques \- Psychology Today, [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/surviving-your-childs-adolescence/202112/adolescence-and-the-power-of-social-cliques](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/surviving-your-childs-adolescence/202112/adolescence-and-the-power-of-social-cliques)  
6. Social Cliques and Their Grip on Adolescence \- Chase Bjork Foundation, [https://www.chasebjork.org/post/social-cliques-and-their-grip-on-adolescence](https://www.chasebjork.org/post/social-cliques-and-their-grip-on-adolescence)  
7. Group Dynamics and Behaviour \- ERIC, [https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1201477.pdf](https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1201477.pdf)  
8. Group Dynamics | Definition, Theory & Examples \- Lesson \- Study.com, [https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-are-group-dynamics-definition-theory-quiz.html](https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-are-group-dynamics-definition-theory-quiz.html)  
9. ATTACHMENT STYLES AND SOCIAL GROUPS: REVIEW OF A DECADE, [https://www.tpmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/18.1.2.pdf](https://www.tpmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/18.1.2.pdf)  
10. Click or Clique: Positive and Negative Teen Social Groups \- Psych Central, [https://psychcentral.com/lib/click-or-clique-positive-and-negative-teen-social-groups](https://psychcentral.com/lib/click-or-clique-positive-and-negative-teen-social-groups)  
11. Understanding Cliques | Nemours KidsHealth, [https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/understanding-cliques.html](https://kidshealth.org/en/parents/understanding-cliques.html)  
12. Deliberative participation and personality: the effect of traits, situations, and motivation | European Political Science Review \- Cambridge University Press & Assessment, [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-political-science-review/article/deliberative-participation-and-personality-the-effect-of-traits-situations-and-motivation/45E122EDFFC9D986AEC9A580D785EC17](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-political-science-review/article/deliberative-participation-and-personality-the-effect-of-traits-situations-and-motivation/45E122EDFFC9D986AEC9A580D785EC17)  
13. The Moderating Role of Clique Hierarchical Organization on Resource Control by Central Clique Members | Request PDF \- ResearchGate, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329716883\_The\_Moderating\_Role\_of\_Clique\_Hierarchical\_Organization\_on\_Resource\_Control\_by\_Central\_Clique\_Members](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329716883_The_Moderating_Role_of_Clique_Hierarchical_Organization_on_Resource_Control_by_Central_Clique_Members)  
14. How are Popularity Goals and Self-Perceived Popularity Related to Aggression and Victimization? \- DigitalCommons@UNO, [https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/psychfacpub/article/1348/\&path\_info=Yearning\_for\_Popularity\_How\_are\_Popularity\_Goals\_and\_Self\_Perceived\_Popularity\_Related\_to\_Aggression\_and\_Victimization.pdf](https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/psychfacpub/article/1348/&path_info=Yearning_for_Popularity_How_are_Popularity_Goals_and_Self_Perceived_Popularity_Related_to_Aggression_and_Victimization.pdf)  
15. The Moderating Role of Clique Hierarchical Organization on Resource Control by Central Clique Members \- PubMed, [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30560514/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30560514/)  
16. Social Network Analysis \- The Decision Lab, [https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/computer-science/social-network-analysis](https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guide/computer-science/social-network-analysis)  
17. Introduction to historical (social) network analysis – Part I \- DH Lab, [https://dhlab.hypotheses.org/2363](https://dhlab.hypotheses.org/2363)  
18. Clique Counts for Network Similarity⋆ \- Toronto Metropolitan University, [https://math.ryerson.ca/\~abonato/papers/Clique\_010524.pdf](https://math.ryerson.ca/~abonato/papers/Clique_010524.pdf)  
19. Core-Periphery Structure in Networks \- People, [https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/\~porterm/papers/cp-siam-published.pdf](https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/~porterm/papers/cp-siam-published.pdf)  
20. Core-Periphery Structure in Networks (Revisited) | SIAM Review \- UCLA Mathematics, [https://www.math.ucla.edu/\~mason/papers/CP-revisited-sirev.pdf](https://www.math.ucla.edu/~mason/papers/CP-revisited-sirev.pdf)  
21. Profiling core-periphery network structure by random walkers \- PMC, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3601366/](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3601366/)  
22. \[2202.12769\] Core-periphery detection in hypergraphs \- arXiv, [https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.12769](https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.12769)  
23. Social Network Analysis 101: Ultimate Guide, [https://visiblenetworklabs.com/guides/social-network-analysis-101/](https://visiblenetworklabs.com/guides/social-network-analysis-101/)  
24. Preadolescent Clique Hierarchies Explained | PDF | Social Stratification | Friendship \- Scribd, [https://www.scribd.com/document/928825836/Clique-and-Identty](https://www.scribd.com/document/928825836/Clique-and-Identty)  
25. Network Analysis 101 | Center for Public Health Systems Science | Washington University in St. Louis, [https://cphss.wustl.edu/methodsandstrategies/social-network-analysis/network-analysis-101/](https://cphss.wustl.edu/methodsandstrategies/social-network-analysis/network-analysis-101/)  
26. Peer Cliques | Encyclopedia.com, [https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/peer-cliques](https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/peer-cliques)  
27. Peer Relationships | Lifespan Development \- Lumen Learning, [https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hvcc-lifespandevelopment4/chapter/peer-relationships/](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hvcc-lifespandevelopment4/chapter/peer-relationships/)  
28. The Impact of Peer Relationships on Adolescent Development \- Psychology Town, [https://psychology.town/developmental/impact-peer-relationships-adolescent-development/](https://psychology.town/developmental/impact-peer-relationships-adolescent-development/)  
29. Crowds (adolescence) \- Wikipedia, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowds\_(adolescence)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowds_\(adolescence\))  
30. Crowds, Clique, and Close Friendship – Middle Childhood and Adolescent Psychology, [https://wisconsin.pressbooks.pub/adolescentpsychology/chapter/peer-relationships/](https://wisconsin.pressbooks.pub/adolescentpsychology/chapter/peer-relationships/)  
31. The Meaning of Popularity \- Marquette Messenger, [https://marquettemessenger.com/features/2014/10/13/the-meaning-of-popularity/](https://marquettemessenger.com/features/2014/10/13/the-meaning-of-popularity/)  
32. Smoke in the Looking Glass: Effects of Discordance Between Self- and Peer Rated Crowd Affiliation on Adolescent Anxiety, Depress, [https://prsg.wiscweb.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1209/2019/09/brown-et-al-08-Smoke-in-looking-glass.pdf](https://prsg.wiscweb.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1209/2019/09/brown-et-al-08-Smoke-in-looking-glass.pdf)  
33. Americans recall their membership in high school cliques \- YouGov, [https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/45000-americans-recall-membership-high-school-cliques](https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/45000-americans-recall-membership-high-school-cliques)  
34. 25 High School Cliques (& Expert Commentary on Dealing WIth Them) \- wikiHow, [https://www.wikihow.com/High-School-Cliques](https://www.wikihow.com/High-School-Cliques)  
35. Psychology Study Guide: Peer Groups, Friendships & Identity | Notes \- Pearson, [https://www.pearson.com/channels/psychology/study-guides/adolescent-peer-and-romantic-relationships-developmental-psychology](https://www.pearson.com/channels/psychology/study-guides/adolescent-peer-and-romantic-relationships-developmental-psychology)  
36. What are some common cliques at USA high schools that aren't just jocks or nerds or preps? : r/AskAnAmerican \- Reddit, [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAnAmerican/comments/1ajbuhn/what\_are\_some\_common\_cliques\_at\_usa\_high\_schools/](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskAnAmerican/comments/1ajbuhn/what_are_some_common_cliques_at_usa_high_schools/)  
37. Queen Bees & Wannabes \- Rosalind Wiseman, [https://rosalindwiseman.com/queen-bees-and-wannabes](https://rosalindwiseman.com/queen-bees-and-wannabes)  
38. queen-bees-reading-part-1.pdf, [https://waylandbrown.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/queen-bees-reading-part-1.pdf](https://waylandbrown.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/queen-bees-reading-part-1.pdf)  
39. Pleaser, Queen Bee, Sidekick: Handling Class Cliques \- IDEA Health & Fitness Association, [https://www.ideafit.com/pleaser-queen-bee-sidekick-handling-class-cliques/](https://www.ideafit.com/pleaser-queen-bee-sidekick-handling-class-cliques/)  
40. Children's Cliques, Play And Culture Revealed By Sociologist Spouses | CU Boulder Today, [https://www.colorado.edu/today/1998/02/19/childrens-cliques-play-and-culture-revealed-sociologist-spouses](https://www.colorado.edu/today/1998/02/19/childrens-cliques-play-and-culture-revealed-sociologist-spouses)  
41. Cliques Versus True Friendship \- Sidelines Magazine, [https://sidelinesmagazine.com/sidelines-spotlight/cliques-versus-true-friendship-2/](https://sidelinesmagazine.com/sidelines-spotlight/cliques-versus-true-friendship-2/)  
42. Examination of the contribution of clique characteristics to children's adjustment: Clique type and perceived cohesion \- ResearchGate, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247779568\_Examination\_of\_the\_contribution\_of\_clique\_characteristics\_to\_children's\_adjustment\_Clique\_type\_and\_perceived\_cohesion](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247779568_Examination_of_the_contribution_of_clique_characteristics_to_children's_adjustment_Clique_type_and_perceived_cohesion)  
43. Do Science and Common Wisdom Collide or Coincide in their Understanding of Relational Aggression? \- PMC, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3153789/](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3153789/)  
44. The Mental Health Impact of Teen Cliques \- Newport Academy, [https://www.newportacademy.com/resources/mental-health/teen-cliques/](https://www.newportacademy.com/resources/mental-health/teen-cliques/)  
45. Structure Matters: The Role of Clique Hierarchy in the Relationship Between Adolescent Social Status and Aggression and Prosociality \- PMC, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4636991/](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4636991/)  
46. RWJF \- Qualitative Research Guidelines Project | Membership Roles (Adler and Adler), [http://www.qualres.org/HomeMemb-3649.html](http://www.qualres.org/HomeMemb-3649.html)  
47. (PDF) Basking in reflected glory and its limits: Why adolescents hang out with popular peers. The TRAILS study \- ResearchGate, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221937707\_Basking\_in\_reflected\_glory\_and\_its\_limits\_Why\_adolescents\_hang\_out\_with\_popular\_peers\_The\_TRAILS\_study](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221937707_Basking_in_reflected_glory_and_its_limits_Why_adolescents_hang_out_with_popular_peers_The_TRAILS_study)  
48. 15 Sociology Adler Peer Power \- Quia, [https://www.quia.com/sv/681544.html](https://www.quia.com/sv/681544.html)  
49. The Invisible Walls of Adult Cliques – ProteanMed, [https://proteanmed.com/blog/the-invisible-walls-of-adult-cliques/](https://proteanmed.com/blog/the-invisible-walls-of-adult-cliques/)  
50. Cliques | Sociology | Research Starters \- EBSCO, [https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/sociology/cliques](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/sociology/cliques)  
51. Cliques at Work: Reasons and How to Deal with This Behavior \- Insperity, [https://www.insperity.com/blog/cliques-at-work/](https://www.insperity.com/blog/cliques-at-work/)  
52. Clique \- Group Dynamics \- BrainKart, [https://arts.brainkart.com/article/clique---group-dynamics-483/](https://arts.brainkart.com/article/clique---group-dynamics-483/)  
53. Men Who Manage, [https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781351505819\_A30457285/preview-9781351505819\_A30457285.pdf](https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781351505819_A30457285/preview-9781351505819_A30457285.pdf)  
54. NTA UGC NET/JRF 2021, [https://player.uacdn.net/slides\_pdf/TO924C74FF7OFW2NL1MI/OB\_\_Group\_Dynamics\_\_Part\_III\_no\_anno.pdf](https://player.uacdn.net/slides_pdf/TO924C74FF7OFW2NL1MI/OB__Group_Dynamics__Part_III_no_anno.pdf)  
55. Breaking the Bond: Understanding and Addressing Workplace Cliques, [https://worksmartlivesmart.com/workplace-cliques/](https://worksmartlivesmart.com/workplace-cliques/)  
56. How To Deal With Cliques & Favoritism In The Workplace \- Pollack Peacebuilding Systems, [https://pollackpeacebuilding.com/blog/workplace-favoritism-cliques/](https://pollackpeacebuilding.com/blog/workplace-favoritism-cliques/)  
57. Cliques at Work Explained 2026 | Meaning, Causes & Impact \- DavidsonMorris, [https://www.davidsonmorris.com/cliques-at-work/](https://www.davidsonmorris.com/cliques-at-work/)  
58. How To Handle Cliques at Work | Indeed.com, [https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/work-cliques](https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/work-cliques)  
59. The Clique Imaginary \- The New Inquiry, [https://thenewinquiry.com/the-clique-imaginary/](https://thenewinquiry.com/the-clique-imaginary/)