Summary of the Organizational Behavior course at the KUL taught by prof Nicky Dries. For the exam, I only used this document and obtained a 17/20. The document covers the entire subject matter (excluding guest lessons-> change every year and are not very relevant)
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!
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller maud25. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $17.59. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
