Organizational behaviour
Chapter 1: groups and teams
How to compose a dreamteam?
1. Relationship to deadlines (who is early/who is late?)
2. Preferred topic
3. Desired outcome (quickly satisfied?)
4. Educational background/ knowledge (who contributes what?)
5. Team roles (Belbin)
Groups vs teams
Groups: based on social psychology and describes the natural behavioural patterns of people
in a group. (eg. Erasmus students, your family, your department, your neighbourhood, the
FEB )
Teams: based on organizational behaviour, prescribes how teams should be composed and
managed→ most effective (based on what we know from groups). Goal of teamwork=
create a result that is better than the sum of all individual inputs. A group= a team when
there is INTERDEPENDENCE between members and there is coordinated collective effort
towards one shared end result. (eg. Soccer team, debate team, …)
Student groups vs teams
Group: student works in isolation on a part of the assignment, everyone’s input integrated
at the end→ no advantages from collaboration + little coordination
Teams: frequent interaction between students + collaboration→ consensus + joint effort
(same goal), identity as a team = cohesive result
Group properties
1. Size: small<->large (law of diminishing returns on productivity; odd number may
protect against ‘deadlock’ bij stemming)
2. Cohesiveness: attraction and motivation to remain a group (friends vs strangers)
3. Diversity: the extent to which members of team are similar=homogeneous<->
different=heterogeneous
• Surface-level diversity: observable (national origin, race, gender…) op eerste
zicht
• Deep-level diversity: differences in underlying attitudes, values and
opinions→ fundamentele verschillen
4. Norms: standards of behaviour shared by the group→ min need of external control
5. Roles: set of expected behavioral patterns attributed to someone in a certain
position in a social unit. (eg. Leader, mother, secretary)
6. Status: socially defined position/rank given to groups/teams/members→ based on
power held over others, one’s abilities, and/or valued personal characteristics
(rijkste,slimste,liefste)
,Size
• Smaller groups= faster + better performance of individuals
• Problem solving→larger=better (group intelligence)
• 12 or more= generating diverse output
• 7 or less=doing something productive with input
Social loafing=the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively
than when working individually (ringelmann’s rope-pullig experiments→ the more people
the less individuals are pulling)
-how to prevent?
• Causes: re-establishing equity(other people feel that they are doing the most→
decrease in average effort), dispersion of responsibility (nobody feels responsible),
free rider problem
• Preventions: set common purpose/vision and group goals, increase competition
between different groups (forced ranking), choose team players (Belbin)
Cohesiveness
the relationship between group/team cohesiveness and productivity depends on the
group/team’s performance-related norms (zie figuur slides→should you team up with
friends?--> IT DEPENDS)
-how to increase group/team cohesiveness
• Small groups (<7)
• Mutually decide on goals→ encourages agreement
• Increase time members spend together
• Increase group status = exclusivity of becoming member→elite
• Stimulate competition with other groups
• Reward the group > reward the individual
• Physically isolate (teambuilding)
Diversity
Most studies conclude that diversity is not good for team performance.
,Surface-level diversity → deep-level diversity (it takes longer for diverse groups to learn
what they have in common and how to work together → expectations of conflicts in case of
dissimilarities; negative start)
On the other hand:
• Surface-level diversity → more open-minded team members in meetings
• more similarity→less creativity
• conflict→good decision making
• divers= reality →otherwise discrimination
• many personal differences? Work task-focused!
• Neg effects typically diminish after 3 months of teamwork→make the teamwork last
long enough to reap the benefits!
Cognitive diversity→ big plus in group decision making; it comprises the diversity of
• Knowledge (non-overlapping)
• Perspective (different)
• Interpretation→ different ways of categorizing problems (quick solution vs consensus
LT) or classifying perspectives (cheap vs quality solution)
• Heuristics→ different problem-solving methods/cognitive rules (math vs language
brain)
• Predictive models→ cause and effect; optimist vs defeatist
Norms (rules of conduct you cannot escape)
Conformity pressures → members desire acceptance of the group (you conform to the
group’s norms to feel good)
✓ Makes people feel safe in group consensus
✓ Sharing norms→ meaningful social relationships/community (eg: in this
neighbourhood we recycle)
✓ Norms = input for self-concept (who am I? →reference groups)
Reference group → a group that is important to an individual, to which he belongs or hopes
to belong to, and with whose norms he is likely to conform
Types of norms: performance norms, appearance norms (social tribes images), arrangement
norms, resource allocation norms (do some people get more ressources?)
• Adhering to norms of a group→ essential to fit in!
• Norms = mutually shared by members to be a ‘norm’→ discussed when forming a
group
• New members → observe the norms + avoid norm violation
• Re-evaluate norms over time→ not always desired outcome
➢ eg: Hawtorne studies→ conformity with sub-optimal performance norms;
equal performance among colleagues to prevent cut of bonusses, layoffs and
higher quotas
, ➢ eg: Solomon Ash’s ‘unsuspecting subject’ experiment (USS)→75% conformed
to a ‘lijnstuk’ that they knew was wrong (average conformer gave wrong
answers 37% of the time)
Belbin team roles
Dr. Meredith Belbin (early 1970s): a management psychologist who tried to predict the
success of teams→dividing participants according to psychological types (introv/extrov…).
Perfect team mix is based on clusters or patterns of behaviour. Individuals often have a
preference for one or more of these clusters.
! no team was ever perfect for every task ! →no ideal team: teams are simply more or less
suited for a specific task
Belbin identified 8 clusters; a team role : a tendency by an individual to behave, contribute
or interrelate with others in a team in certain ways→ often we have a preference for two
roles- a primary and a back up
Key factors when putting together a general team (Belbin)
• wide coverage of all team roles
• or select based on the nature of the task (eg completer/finisher when strict deadline)
• secure good match between functional role and team (let everyone take the right
role that fits them)
• create awareness of the various team roles + their impact on team performance
Belbin team roles
1) implementer→ works best when allowed to work in an organized way
2) coordinator→ works best when there are clear objectives
3) shaper→ works best on own initiative and limited compromise
4) plant→ works best on their own
5) resource investigator→ works best when free to get out and meet people
6) monitor/evaluator→ works best when allowed to analyse facts
7) teamworker→ works best when given time and freedom to develop good relations
8) completer/finisher→ works best when high standards are expected and checked
Status
• high-status individuals are often given more freedom to deviate from norms and
better able to resist conformity pressures (vb Bill gates in jeans)
• Lower-status individuals participate less actively in group/team discussions→ failure
to utilize their expertise is a threat to the team’s performance
• Status will only be accepted by teams when based on merit (power, abilities, traits)
rather than politics (son of the boss, rich parents)
• Status is not automatically carried over from one group to another
• Want a high status in your group? Impression management!
Chapter 1: groups and teams
How to compose a dreamteam?
1. Relationship to deadlines (who is early/who is late?)
2. Preferred topic
3. Desired outcome (quickly satisfied?)
4. Educational background/ knowledge (who contributes what?)
5. Team roles (Belbin)
Groups vs teams
Groups: based on social psychology and describes the natural behavioural patterns of people
in a group. (eg. Erasmus students, your family, your department, your neighbourhood, the
FEB )
Teams: based on organizational behaviour, prescribes how teams should be composed and
managed→ most effective (based on what we know from groups). Goal of teamwork=
create a result that is better than the sum of all individual inputs. A group= a team when
there is INTERDEPENDENCE between members and there is coordinated collective effort
towards one shared end result. (eg. Soccer team, debate team, …)
Student groups vs teams
Group: student works in isolation on a part of the assignment, everyone’s input integrated
at the end→ no advantages from collaboration + little coordination
Teams: frequent interaction between students + collaboration→ consensus + joint effort
(same goal), identity as a team = cohesive result
Group properties
1. Size: small<->large (law of diminishing returns on productivity; odd number may
protect against ‘deadlock’ bij stemming)
2. Cohesiveness: attraction and motivation to remain a group (friends vs strangers)
3. Diversity: the extent to which members of team are similar=homogeneous<->
different=heterogeneous
• Surface-level diversity: observable (national origin, race, gender…) op eerste
zicht
• Deep-level diversity: differences in underlying attitudes, values and
opinions→ fundamentele verschillen
4. Norms: standards of behaviour shared by the group→ min need of external control
5. Roles: set of expected behavioral patterns attributed to someone in a certain
position in a social unit. (eg. Leader, mother, secretary)
6. Status: socially defined position/rank given to groups/teams/members→ based on
power held over others, one’s abilities, and/or valued personal characteristics
(rijkste,slimste,liefste)
,Size
• Smaller groups= faster + better performance of individuals
• Problem solving→larger=better (group intelligence)
• 12 or more= generating diverse output
• 7 or less=doing something productive with input
Social loafing=the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively
than when working individually (ringelmann’s rope-pullig experiments→ the more people
the less individuals are pulling)
-how to prevent?
• Causes: re-establishing equity(other people feel that they are doing the most→
decrease in average effort), dispersion of responsibility (nobody feels responsible),
free rider problem
• Preventions: set common purpose/vision and group goals, increase competition
between different groups (forced ranking), choose team players (Belbin)
Cohesiveness
the relationship between group/team cohesiveness and productivity depends on the
group/team’s performance-related norms (zie figuur slides→should you team up with
friends?--> IT DEPENDS)
-how to increase group/team cohesiveness
• Small groups (<7)
• Mutually decide on goals→ encourages agreement
• Increase time members spend together
• Increase group status = exclusivity of becoming member→elite
• Stimulate competition with other groups
• Reward the group > reward the individual
• Physically isolate (teambuilding)
Diversity
Most studies conclude that diversity is not good for team performance.
,Surface-level diversity → deep-level diversity (it takes longer for diverse groups to learn
what they have in common and how to work together → expectations of conflicts in case of
dissimilarities; negative start)
On the other hand:
• Surface-level diversity → more open-minded team members in meetings
• more similarity→less creativity
• conflict→good decision making
• divers= reality →otherwise discrimination
• many personal differences? Work task-focused!
• Neg effects typically diminish after 3 months of teamwork→make the teamwork last
long enough to reap the benefits!
Cognitive diversity→ big plus in group decision making; it comprises the diversity of
• Knowledge (non-overlapping)
• Perspective (different)
• Interpretation→ different ways of categorizing problems (quick solution vs consensus
LT) or classifying perspectives (cheap vs quality solution)
• Heuristics→ different problem-solving methods/cognitive rules (math vs language
brain)
• Predictive models→ cause and effect; optimist vs defeatist
Norms (rules of conduct you cannot escape)
Conformity pressures → members desire acceptance of the group (you conform to the
group’s norms to feel good)
✓ Makes people feel safe in group consensus
✓ Sharing norms→ meaningful social relationships/community (eg: in this
neighbourhood we recycle)
✓ Norms = input for self-concept (who am I? →reference groups)
Reference group → a group that is important to an individual, to which he belongs or hopes
to belong to, and with whose norms he is likely to conform
Types of norms: performance norms, appearance norms (social tribes images), arrangement
norms, resource allocation norms (do some people get more ressources?)
• Adhering to norms of a group→ essential to fit in!
• Norms = mutually shared by members to be a ‘norm’→ discussed when forming a
group
• New members → observe the norms + avoid norm violation
• Re-evaluate norms over time→ not always desired outcome
➢ eg: Hawtorne studies→ conformity with sub-optimal performance norms;
equal performance among colleagues to prevent cut of bonusses, layoffs and
higher quotas
, ➢ eg: Solomon Ash’s ‘unsuspecting subject’ experiment (USS)→75% conformed
to a ‘lijnstuk’ that they knew was wrong (average conformer gave wrong
answers 37% of the time)
Belbin team roles
Dr. Meredith Belbin (early 1970s): a management psychologist who tried to predict the
success of teams→dividing participants according to psychological types (introv/extrov…).
Perfect team mix is based on clusters or patterns of behaviour. Individuals often have a
preference for one or more of these clusters.
! no team was ever perfect for every task ! →no ideal team: teams are simply more or less
suited for a specific task
Belbin identified 8 clusters; a team role : a tendency by an individual to behave, contribute
or interrelate with others in a team in certain ways→ often we have a preference for two
roles- a primary and a back up
Key factors when putting together a general team (Belbin)
• wide coverage of all team roles
• or select based on the nature of the task (eg completer/finisher when strict deadline)
• secure good match between functional role and team (let everyone take the right
role that fits them)
• create awareness of the various team roles + their impact on team performance
Belbin team roles
1) implementer→ works best when allowed to work in an organized way
2) coordinator→ works best when there are clear objectives
3) shaper→ works best on own initiative and limited compromise
4) plant→ works best on their own
5) resource investigator→ works best when free to get out and meet people
6) monitor/evaluator→ works best when allowed to analyse facts
7) teamworker→ works best when given time and freedom to develop good relations
8) completer/finisher→ works best when high standards are expected and checked
Status
• high-status individuals are often given more freedom to deviate from norms and
better able to resist conformity pressures (vb Bill gates in jeans)
• Lower-status individuals participate less actively in group/team discussions→ failure
to utilize their expertise is a threat to the team’s performance
• Status will only be accepted by teams when based on merit (power, abilities, traits)
rather than politics (son of the boss, rich parents)
• Status is not automatically carried over from one group to another
• Want a high status in your group? Impression management!
