Organizational Behavior Exam Preparation Material | WGU Organizational Behavior (GTO1, C715)

Explanation:
Cohesiveness is generally viewed as a desirable trait in organizational groups because of its potential to improve group productivity. In a highly cohesive group, members are more likely to communicate effectively, experience less internal friction, and display higher levels of commitment to group goals. This internal synergy typically leads to a more efficient work process and higher quality output.
However, the relationship between cohesiveness and productivity is moderated by performance-related norms. If a cohesive group has high performance norms (standards for hard work and quality), productivity will be significantly higher than in a group with low cohesiveness. Conversely, if a highly cohesive group has low performance norms, their productivity may actually decrease because they are united in their desire to work less. Despite this nuance, the fundamental positive organizational outcome associated with fostering cohesion is the enhancement of the group's ability to produce results.

Explanation:
The interaction between cohesiveness and performance norms is a critical concept in Organizational Behavior. As shown in the research regarding group dynamics, the productivity of the team will improve significantly when both cohesiveness and performance norms are high. Cohesiveness provides the social "glue" that keeps the team together, while performance norms provide the "direction" by establishing clear expectations for effort, output, and quality.
When these two factors coincide, the group becomes a powerful force; members motivate one another to meet the high standards they have collectively accepted. This is the "ideal" state for any work team. If cohesiveness is high but performance norms are low, the group is unified but unproductive. If cohesiveness is low but norms are high, productivity improves only slightly because members lack the social bond to sustain high-level collaboration. Therefore, the combination of a strong bond and high standards yields the most significant productivity gains.

Explanation:
Virtual teams use computer technology to unite physically dispersed members in order to achieve a common goal. The defining advantage of virtual teams is their ability to overcome the constraints of time and space, allowing people to work together who might otherwise not be able to collaborate on a work task. This is particularly beneficial for global organizations that need to pull together the best experts regardless of where they are located in the world.



However, virtual teams face unique challenges compared to face-to-face teams. Because they rely on electronic communication, they often suffer from a lack of nonverbal cues (like body language and tone of voice), which makes communication less rich and more prone to misunderstanding. Consequently, virtual teams often report lower levels of satisfaction with the interaction process and may take longer to build trust and rapport (refuting options B and D). To be effective, managers of virtual teams must ensure that the team has the right technology, that progress is closely monitored, and that efforts are made to create "social presence" through occasional video calls or face-to-face meetings to build the trust that forms more naturally in traditional office settings. Despite these hurdles, the strategic benefit of accessing diverse talent from across the globe makes the virtual team an essential tool in the modern organizational landscape.

Explanation:
While a strong culture can be a significant asset by improving employee commitment and reducing ambiguity, it can also become a liability under certain conditions. One of the most critical liabilities occurs when a strong organizational culture limits diversity within the organization. Because a strong culture pressures employees to conform to accepted values and behaviors, it can create a "mismatch" for people who bring different perspectives or backgrounds.
Strong cultures often act as a barrier to change because they lead to institutionalization, where behaviors are followed blindly without question. This can be particularly damaging during mergers or acquisitions, where two conflicting strong cultures may fail to integrate. Furthermore, when the shared values do not align with the organization's effectiveness in a changing environment, the culture becomes a "barrier to diversity" and a "barrier to change". Management must therefore balance the benefits of a cohesive culture with the need for diverse viewpoints that prevent "groupthink" and allow the organization to remain adaptable