Summary Organizational behavior – Liv Van Dyck 2024
Course One: Group & Teams
Groups vs teams:
Groups describes the natural behavioral patterns people tend to fall into
Teams prescribe how teams should be composed and (self-)managed
=> goal of teamwork: to create a result that is better than the sum of all
individual inputs
Connection: a group is only a team if members depend on each other to succeed!
Difference:
Group Team
Each person works in isolation The persons interact and collaborate with
each other
Everyone’s input is quickly integrated at Aim for consensus
the end
Little coordination Everyone knows what everyone is
working on
No advantages or learning from each Final result is cohesive
other
There are 6 different properties
=> each property has an influence on the team work
1. Size of the teams/groups
o Smaller groups = faster & individuals usually perform better
lager groups = better for problem solving (Cfr. Group
intelligence)
o Dozen or more => generating diverse input
o Seven or les => doing something productive with input
Social loafing
= the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively
than when working individually
Example: Ringelmann’s rope-pulling experiments
- Alone = 63 kg
- With 3 people = 53 kg
- With eight people = 31 kg
=> if you are alone you can pull a stronger rope because with other people you will
underperform yourself
Cause of social loafing:
o Re-establishing equity
= others aren’t doing much so it is not fair if I do much
=> equity refers to fairness: difference between input and outcome (Cfr. Course
Three)
o Dispersion of responsibility
1
Liv Van Dyck
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
, => results can’t be attributed to any single person => nobody feels
responsible
o Free riders
= people who take advantage pf working in group
=> they do nothing but get the same (good) result as the people who did
something
How to prevent it:
o Set group goals
=> work more in a team
o Increase competition between different groups
=> example: forced ranking = only one group can win (Cfr. Course
2)
o Fill your team with ‘team players’
2. Cohesiveness [= samenhang]
= the relationship between cohesiveness and productivity depends on the
performance-related norms
=> performance norm = standard norm
How to increase group cohesiveness:
o Keep groups < 7
o Encourage goals
o Stimulate competition with other groups
o Give rewards to the group rather than to individual
o Physically isolate the group
=> example: teambuilding in the woods
3. Diversity
= not good for team performance
o Surface-level diversity:
= a slower start because you take time to know each other
o
Deep-level diversity
= different attitude etc
=> it takes longer for diverse groups to discover what they have in common
+ people expect conflicts with others wo look dissimilar => have negative
expectations from the start
Cognitive diversity
2
Liv Van Dyck
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
, = the different ways people think, solve problems and process information
=> positive thing in group decision making
o Knowledge
o Perspective
= different ways of looking at a problem
o Interpretation
= different ways of categorizing a problem
o Heuristics
= different ways of generating solutions to problems
o Predictive models
= different ways of inferring cause and effect
4. Norms
It is something that are part of society
=> they make clear how to behave, how to act
o Conformity pressures:
As a member you desire acceptance by the group
Team effectiveness => boundary conditions
= teams have the potential to be more effective than individual performers when…
… task = complex
… time to work through a group
… all members are committed
=> 5 reasons:
1. Teams produce great number of ideas
2. Participation creates understanding and acceptance of decisions
3. Social facilitation
= motivation to outperform yourself because others perform better/ are highly
motivated
(opposite effect of social loafing)
4. Teams offset personal biases and blind spots (cfr. Course 4)
5. Teams makes more risky decisions + innovative solutions
Group intelligence
problems involving figure out the value of something (= state estimation problems)
=> take the average of all answers in the group
problems involving choosing the right answer
=> majority rule
BUT only if 3 boundary conditions are fulfilled:
1. people must be willing/able to think for themselves + reach independent
conclusions
2. question must have a right answer that can be checked against reality
3. everyone must answer the exact same question
State estimation problems:
Experiment = guess how much jellybeans are inside the jar
Results = 73 students guess the correct number, only 2 students did better than
average
- diversity prediction theorem:
o collective error = average individual error – prediction diversity
= average of how much each person was off – range of answers
=> overly high and overly low guesses cancel each other out
3
Liv Van Dyck
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
, - wisdom of the crowd:
=> only works if guesses are completely independent
Groupthink
= a phenomenon in which the norm for consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of
alternative courses of action
=> conformity pressures
- group members rationalize away everything that goes against their basic
assumptions
Ex.: nobody will find out
- members apply direct pressure to those who disagree
Ex.: you are the only one who disagree
- afraid to speak up against everyone else
=> people keep silent, minimize their own doubts
Ex.: I won’t say anything because it isn’t really my problem
- illusion of unanimity
= silence seen as agreement
=> you need one person that breaks the pattern of the group for others to break out
aswell
Groupshift/ polarization
= the discussion leads members towards one more extreme view of their original position
- conservatives become more conservative = conservative shift
- risk takers become more risky = risky shift
Explanations:
- through the discussion: people become more comfortable in expressing their
opinion
- because the final group decision
=> people feel less responsible => propose extreme suggestions
(other people will mellow it out if it is to extreme)
- some people like to show that they are different ( not a follower)
- some people like to show how much they care about the issue
Course Two: Rewards & Differentiation
Differentiation = what happens if you treat people, who work together, different
=> in companies it is based on:
1. Position / function
2. Performance / contribution / talent
3. Gender / age (Cfr. Course 5)
o Equity / merit = je krijgt terug naar gelang wat je
= a solution for addressing imbalanced social systems ervoor doet
= rewards are distributed in accordance with their contribution
outcome-input ratio
Goal: to promote efficient economic interactions
= creëren van zelfde
4
Liv Van Dyck startpositie
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
Course One: Group & Teams
Groups vs teams:
Groups describes the natural behavioral patterns people tend to fall into
Teams prescribe how teams should be composed and (self-)managed
=> goal of teamwork: to create a result that is better than the sum of all
individual inputs
Connection: a group is only a team if members depend on each other to succeed!
Difference:
Group Team
Each person works in isolation The persons interact and collaborate with
each other
Everyone’s input is quickly integrated at Aim for consensus
the end
Little coordination Everyone knows what everyone is
working on
No advantages or learning from each Final result is cohesive
other
There are 6 different properties
=> each property has an influence on the team work
1. Size of the teams/groups
o Smaller groups = faster & individuals usually perform better
lager groups = better for problem solving (Cfr. Group
intelligence)
o Dozen or more => generating diverse input
o Seven or les => doing something productive with input
Social loafing
= the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively
than when working individually
Example: Ringelmann’s rope-pulling experiments
- Alone = 63 kg
- With 3 people = 53 kg
- With eight people = 31 kg
=> if you are alone you can pull a stronger rope because with other people you will
underperform yourself
Cause of social loafing:
o Re-establishing equity
= others aren’t doing much so it is not fair if I do much
=> equity refers to fairness: difference between input and outcome (Cfr. Course
Three)
o Dispersion of responsibility
1
Liv Van Dyck
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
, => results can’t be attributed to any single person => nobody feels
responsible
o Free riders
= people who take advantage pf working in group
=> they do nothing but get the same (good) result as the people who did
something
How to prevent it:
o Set group goals
=> work more in a team
o Increase competition between different groups
=> example: forced ranking = only one group can win (Cfr. Course
2)
o Fill your team with ‘team players’
2. Cohesiveness [= samenhang]
= the relationship between cohesiveness and productivity depends on the
performance-related norms
=> performance norm = standard norm
How to increase group cohesiveness:
o Keep groups < 7
o Encourage goals
o Stimulate competition with other groups
o Give rewards to the group rather than to individual
o Physically isolate the group
=> example: teambuilding in the woods
3. Diversity
= not good for team performance
o Surface-level diversity:
= a slower start because you take time to know each other
o
Deep-level diversity
= different attitude etc
=> it takes longer for diverse groups to discover what they have in common
+ people expect conflicts with others wo look dissimilar => have negative
expectations from the start
Cognitive diversity
2
Liv Van Dyck
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
, = the different ways people think, solve problems and process information
=> positive thing in group decision making
o Knowledge
o Perspective
= different ways of looking at a problem
o Interpretation
= different ways of categorizing a problem
o Heuristics
= different ways of generating solutions to problems
o Predictive models
= different ways of inferring cause and effect
4. Norms
It is something that are part of society
=> they make clear how to behave, how to act
o Conformity pressures:
As a member you desire acceptance by the group
Team effectiveness => boundary conditions
= teams have the potential to be more effective than individual performers when…
… task = complex
… time to work through a group
… all members are committed
=> 5 reasons:
1. Teams produce great number of ideas
2. Participation creates understanding and acceptance of decisions
3. Social facilitation
= motivation to outperform yourself because others perform better/ are highly
motivated
(opposite effect of social loafing)
4. Teams offset personal biases and blind spots (cfr. Course 4)
5. Teams makes more risky decisions + innovative solutions
Group intelligence
problems involving figure out the value of something (= state estimation problems)
=> take the average of all answers in the group
problems involving choosing the right answer
=> majority rule
BUT only if 3 boundary conditions are fulfilled:
1. people must be willing/able to think for themselves + reach independent
conclusions
2. question must have a right answer that can be checked against reality
3. everyone must answer the exact same question
State estimation problems:
Experiment = guess how much jellybeans are inside the jar
Results = 73 students guess the correct number, only 2 students did better than
average
- diversity prediction theorem:
o collective error = average individual error – prediction diversity
= average of how much each person was off – range of answers
=> overly high and overly low guesses cancel each other out
3
Liv Van Dyck
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
, - wisdom of the crowd:
=> only works if guesses are completely independent
Groupthink
= a phenomenon in which the norm for consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of
alternative courses of action
=> conformity pressures
- group members rationalize away everything that goes against their basic
assumptions
Ex.: nobody will find out
- members apply direct pressure to those who disagree
Ex.: you are the only one who disagree
- afraid to speak up against everyone else
=> people keep silent, minimize their own doubts
Ex.: I won’t say anything because it isn’t really my problem
- illusion of unanimity
= silence seen as agreement
=> you need one person that breaks the pattern of the group for others to break out
aswell
Groupshift/ polarization
= the discussion leads members towards one more extreme view of their original position
- conservatives become more conservative = conservative shift
- risk takers become more risky = risky shift
Explanations:
- through the discussion: people become more comfortable in expressing their
opinion
- because the final group decision
=> people feel less responsible => propose extreme suggestions
(other people will mellow it out if it is to extreme)
- some people like to show that they are different ( not a follower)
- some people like to show how much they care about the issue
Course Two: Rewards & Differentiation
Differentiation = what happens if you treat people, who work together, different
=> in companies it is based on:
1. Position / function
2. Performance / contribution / talent
3. Gender / age (Cfr. Course 5)
o Equity / merit = je krijgt terug naar gelang wat je
= a solution for addressing imbalanced social systems ervoor doet
= rewards are distributed in accordance with their contribution
outcome-input ratio
Goal: to promote efficient economic interactions
= creëren van zelfde
4
Liv Van Dyck startpositie
Organizational Behavior 2024 - 2025
KULeuven
