ArticlePDF Available
HBR.ORGJUNE 
reprint F1106D
DEFEND YOUR RESEARCH
What Makes a
Team Smarter?
More Women
by Anita Woolley and Thomas Malone
Defend Your Research
HBR: But gender does play a role?
Malone: It’s a preliminary nding—and
not a conventional one. The standard
argument is that diversity is good and you
should have both men and women in a
group. But so far, the data show, the more
women, the better.
Woolley: We have early evidence that per-
formance may atten out at the extreme
end—that there should be a little gender
diversity rather than all women.
You realize you’re saying that groups of
women are smarter than groups of men.
Woolley: Yes. And you can tell I’m hesitat-
ing a little. It’s not that I don’t trust the data.
I do. It’s just that part of that nding can be
The finding: There’s little correlation between a group’s collective
intelligence and the IQs of its individual members. But if a group
includes more women, its collective intelligence rises.
The research: Professors Woolley and Malone, along with Chris-
topher Chabris, Sandy Pentland, and Nada Hashmi, gave subjects
aged 18 to 60 standard intelligence tests and assigned them
randomly to teams. Each team was asked to complete several
tasks—including brainstorming, decision making, and visual
puzzles—and to solve one complex problem. Teams were given
intelligence scores based on their performance. Though the
teams that had members with higher IQs didn’t earn much higher
scores, those that had more women did.
The challenge: Are brainy people overrated? Are women the true
key to success? Professors Woolley and Malone, defend your
research.
Thomas Malone
(malone@mit.edu)
is the Patrick J.
McGovern Professor
of Management at
the MIT Sloan School
of Management
and the founding
director of the MIT
Center for Collective
Intelligence.
explained by dierences in social sensitiv-
ity, which we found is also important to
group performance. Many studies have
shown that women tend to score higher on
tests of social sensitivity than men do. So
what is really important is to have people
who are high in social sensitivity, whether
they are men or women.
So you didn’t see a negative correlation
with individual IQs—just a very weak
positive correlation. In theory the 10
smartest people could still make a great
group, right?
Woolley: In theory, yes, the 10 smartest
people could make the smartest group,
but it wouldn’t be just because they were
the most intelligent individuals. What do
you hear about great groups? Not that the
members are all really smart but that they
listen to each other. They share criticism
constructively. They have open minds.
They’re not autocratic. And in our study
we saw pretty clearly that groups that had
smart people dominating the conversation
were not very intelligent groups.
Can teams be too group oriented?
Everyone is so socially sensitive that
there’s no leader?
Woolley: Anecdotally, we know that
groups can become too internally focused.
Our ongoing research suggests that teams
need a moderate level of cognitive diver-
sity for eectiveness. Extremely homoge-
neous or extremely diverse groups aren’t
as intelligent.
In some ways, your findings seem
blindingly obvious: that teams are
more than just a collection of the best
talent.
Anita Woolley
(awoolley@
cmu.edu) is an
assistant professor
of organizational
behavior and
theory at Carnegie
Mellon University.
Woolley: We’ve replicated the nd-
ings twice now. Many of the factors you
might think would be predictive of group
performance were not. Things like group
satisfaction, group cohesion, group
motivation—none were correlated with
collective intelligence. And, of course,
individual intelligence wasn’t highly cor-
related, either.
Malone: Before we did the research, we
were afraid that collective intelligence
would be just the average of all the
individual IQs in a group. So we were
surprised but intrigued to nd that group
intelligence had relatively little to do with
individual intelligence.
What Makes a
Team Smarter?
More Women
2 Harvard Business Review June 2011
IDEA WATCH
HBR puts some surprising findings to the test
Malone: Sure. This is well-known in sports.
Our study shows it with intellectual tasks.
We realized that intelligence tests are a way
to predict individuals’ performance on a
range of tasks, but no one had thought of
using the same approach to predict group
performance.
Woolley: There was a step change in
psychology once the eld had an empirical
method of measuring individual intelli-
gence through IQ tests. We’re hopeful that
this work can create a similar seismic shift
in how we study groups.
Can we design teams to perform better?
Malone: We hope to look at that in the fu-
ture. Though you can change an individu-
al’s intelligence only so much, we think it’s
completely possible to markedly change
a group’s intelligence. You could increase
it by changing members or incentives for
collaboration, for instance.
Woolley: There is some evidence to sug-
gest that collective intelligence exists at the
organizational level, too. Some companies
that do well at scanning the environment
and setting targets also excel at manag-
ing internal operations and mentoring
employees—and have better nancial per-
formance. Consistent performance across
disparate areas of functioning suggests
an organizational collective intelligence,
which could be used to predict company
performance.
So this phenomenon could extend beyond
the small groups you studied?
Malone: Families, companies, and cities
all have collective intelligence. But as
face-to-face groups get bigger, they’re less
able to take advantage of their members.
That suggests size could diminish group
intelligence. But we suspect that technol-
ogy may allow a group to get smarter as it
goes from 10 people to 50 to 500 or even
5,000. Google’s harvesting of knowledge,
Wikipedia’s high-quality product with
almost no centralized control—these are
just the beginning. What we’re starting to
ask is, How can you increase the collective
intelligence of companies, or countries,
or the whole world?
HBR Reprint FD
The Female Factor
HIGH
AVERAGE
LOW
COLLECTIVE
INTELLIGENCE
 
% OF
WOMEN
The chart plots the collective
intelligence scores of the 192
teams in the study against the
percentage of women those
teams contained. The red bars
indicate the range of scores in
the group of teams at each level,
and the blue circles, the average.
Teams with more women tended
to fall above the average; teams
with more men tended to fall
below it.
Harvard
Business
Review
Follow
the
Reader
hbr.org
The Revival of Smart
16425_HBR_1third_vert.indd 3 12/3/10 1:16 PM
FOR ARTICLE REPRINTS CALL  OR , OR VISIT HBR.ORG
Many factors you
might think would
be predictive of
group performance
were not. Group
intelligence had little
to do with individual
intelligence.
... Recent research suggests continual monitoring, regulation, and a collaborative team culture are ideal, lest discrepancies affect overall team efficacy and performance (Driskell et al., 2020). Supporting lines of evidence show that a level of empathy and receptiveness to the experiences and knowledge outside of one's own ("social intelligence" in Woolley and Malone, 2011) is also needed to effectively leverage the diverse abilities found within interdisciplinary teams (Thomas, 2012;Thomas and McDonagh, 2013). This suggests that it is the culture of empathetic openmindedness, inclusivity, and a motivation to achieve team goals that likely drives communication and the crosspollination of interdisciplinary ideas, more so than the method and scale of communication. ...
... James, 2014). An open attitude and commitment to continual and collaborative learning, both individually and as a group, is necessary for disciplinary barriers to be broken down and perspectives to be embraced (Woolley and Malone, 2011;Thomas and McDonagh, 2013;MacLeod and Nagatsu, 2018). In essence, teams would ideally culturally evolve throughout the modeling cycle toward more effective models of (interdisciplinary) cooperation (cf. ...
Article
Full-text available
The pathways taken throughout any model-based process are undoubtedly influenced by the modeling team involved and the decision choices they make. For interconnected socioenvironmental systems (SES), such teams are increasingly interdisciplinary to enable a more expansive and holistic treatment that captures the purpose, the relevant disciplines and sectors, and other contextual settings. In practice, such interdisciplinarity increases the scope of what is considered, thereby increasing choices around model complexity and their effects on uncertainty. Nonetheless, the consideration of scale issues is one critical lens through which to view and question decision choices in the modeling cycle. But separation between team members, both geographically and by discipline, can make the scales involved more arduous to conceptualize, discuss, and treat. In this article, the practices, decisions, and workflow that influence the consideration of scale in SESs modeling are explored through reflexive accounts of two case studies. Through this process and an appreciation of past literature, we draw out several lessons under the following themes: (1) the fostering of collaborative learning and reflection, (2) documenting and justifying the rationale for modeling scale choices, some of which can be equally plausible (a perfect model is not possible), (3) acknowledging that causality is defined subjectively, (4) embracing change and reflection throughout the iterative modeling cycle, and (5) regularly testing the model integration to draw out issues that would otherwise be unnoticeable.
... Thus when equally qualified male and female candidates apply for the same position, managers are more likely to hire the man. Yet, new research published in the Harvard Business Review shows that a higher collective intelligence accrues to teams that include more women, possibly, in part, because women listen better to other team members and work more collaboratively (Woolley and Malone 2011). The patriarchal forces of government and mainstream media can combine with those of the post-secondary sector to create a perfect storm that buffets and punishes women with paradigm-shifting, game-changing ideas. ...
... Our findings suggest that the lack of gender balance is detrimental to the quality of research outputs, with a significant decrease in readability observed as the gender balance ratio in authorship diverges from parity. This is in line with prior research demonstrating that gender mix leads to more effective teams [66][67][68] , better science, and improved patient outcomes 69 . Another possible explanation is that the investigators who strive for gender balance in authorship may be particularly diligent scientists and better research communicators than those who do not cultivate such an endeavor. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Releasing preprints is a popular way to hasten the speed of research but may carry hidden risks for public discourse. The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2 infection highlighted the risk of rushing the publication of unvalidated findings, leading to damaging scientific miscommunication in the most extreme scenarios. Several high-profile preprints, later found to be deeply flawed, have indeed exacerbated widespread skepticism about the risks of the COVID-19 disease - at great cost to public health. Here, preprint article quality during the pandemic is examined by distinguishing papers related to COVID-19 from other research studies. Importantly, our analysis also investigated possible factors contributing to manuscript quality by assessing the relationship between preprint quality and gender balance in authorship within each research discipline. Using a comprehensive data set of preprint articles from medRxiv and bioRxiv from January to May 2020, we construct both a new index of manuscript quality including length, readability, and spelling correctness and a measure of gender mix among a manuscript's authors. We find that papers related to COVID-19 are less well-written than unrelated papers, but that this gap is significantly mitigated by teams with better gender balance, even when controlling for variation by research discipline. Beyond contributing to a systematic evaluation of scientific publishing and dissemination, our results have broader implications for gender and representation as the pandemic has led female researchers to bear more responsibility for childcare under lockdown, inducing additional stress and causing disproportionate harm to women in science.
... The role of inclusive mentoring practices (e.g., sponsoring, counseling, networking, and advocating; Fig 2) is unequivocal in providing essential tools to foster justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion for mentees, preventing toxic mentor-mentee relationships, and overcoming barriers and access in STEMM careers [111,112]. Social belonging and valuing of multiple identities in science reinforces achievement [9,96,113,114], and diverse teams have been shown to increase the rate of innovation and collective creativity [115][116][117]. While good mentorship can foster a sense of belonging in science for the mentee, relationships of many mentees from marginalized groups with their mentors-who are often from the majority group-are not always positive, leading to health issues, such as insomnia and anxiety [118], and lower retention of these groups in science (reviewed in [93,104]). ...
Article
Full-text available
Success and impact metrics in science are based on a system that perpetuates sexist and racist “rewards” by prioritizing citations and impact factors. These metrics are flawed and biased against already marginalized groups and fail to accurately capture the breadth of individuals’ meaningful scientific impacts. We advocate shifting this outdated value system to advance science through principles of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion. We outline pathways for a paradigm shift in scientific values based on multidimensional mentorship and promoting mentee well-being. These actions will require collective efforts supported by academic leaders and administrators to drive essential systemic change.
Chapter
What characterises a society that is resilient in the face of multiple crises – be it an economic crisis, a natural disaster, cyberterrorism, the refugee crisis, or an interdependent combination of all of them? In this chapter I outline general principles that foster capacities for a ‘multi-resilient’ society.
Chapter
Die Einrichtung und der Einsatz von Ständigen Stäben bei der Polizei NRW folgt der Erkenntnis, dass eine einheitliche Struktur und Aufgabenbeschreibung von Führungsstäben allein weder gemeinsame mentale Modelle der Mitarbeiter noch eine hohe Qualität bei der Arbeit in Führungsstäben sicherstellen.
Book
Full-text available
Nitel araştırmalarda araştırılacak konuya göre farklı yollar izlenebilmektedir. Konunun içeriğine göre araştırmacı, konuya dair izlenimlerini oluştururken, araştırma desenlerinden (kültür analizi (etnografya/etnography), kuram oluşturma (grounded/theory), durum çalışması (case study), anlatı-biyografi (narratives), yorumlama (hermenötik/hermeneutics), eylem araştırması (action research), olgu (fenomenoloji/phenomenology) araştırmasından yararlanabilmektedir. Bu doğrultuda her birdesenin kendi içinde bir çalışma konusu ya da bir araştırma yöntemi olarak ele alındığını söylemekte yarar vardır. Bu araştırmada; nitel araştırma desen türlerinden biri olan durum çalışması incelenmiştir. Buna bağlı olarak çalışmada, durum (örnek olay) çalışmasını ayrıntıları ile tanımlamak ve turizm alanında durum çalışmasını bire bir uygulayan çalışmaları yakından inceleyerek, durum çalışmasına örnekleriyle açıklık getirmek amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada tarama yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çalışma amacını karşılayabilmek adına 03.12.2020 ve 18.12.2020 tarihleri arasında gerçekleştirilen tarama sürecinde YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezinde yayımlanan turizm konulu tezlerden (8 tez) yararlanılmıştır. Taranan tezler; araştırmanın amacı, türü, yöntemi, bulgular, veri toplama aracı, örneklem, örnekleme tekniği, örneklem sayısı, sınırlılıklar, yıl, yazarlar ve tez adı olarak 12 başlık altında ele alınmıştır. İncelenen tezlerde, durum çalışmasına yönelik yüksek lisans tezinin daha fazla olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sınırlı sayıda durum çalışması olmasına rağmen, son yıllarda durum çalışmasının arttığı gözlenmiştir. Çalışma bulgularına göre tezlerde çoğunlukla amaçlı örnekleme tekniğinin kullanıldığı, durum/örnek olarak çoğunlukla doğrudan bir turizm işletmesinin örnek olarak çalışıldığı görülmektedir. Diğer taraftan incelenen tez çalışmalarından hareketle bir durumu derinlemesine incelemeye yönelik bir araştırma tasarımının kullanılması, durum çalışmasının en etkin özelliği olarak ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu nedenle derinlemesine araştırılmak istenen bir konu söz konusu olduğunda, durum çalışması deseninden yararlanmanın, açıklayıcı bir yapıya sahip olması nedeniyle araştırma amacını karşılayabilecek doğru bir araştırma tasarımı olabileceği düşünülmektedir. İleride durum çalışmasını derinlemesine inceleyecek olan çalışmaların sadece turizm alanında değil, farklı alanları da dahil ederek durum çalışmasını farklı örnekleri ile yakından incelemeleri önerilmektedir. Bir diğer öneri ise sonraki araştırmalarda durum çalışmasının, avantajları ve dezavantajları kapsamında değerlendirilmesidir. Anahtar kelimeler: Nitel araştırma, durum (örnek olay) çalışması, tarama yöntemi
Chapter
Radiation oncology is a unique field with an exceptionally diverse range of roles in the teams at work in a radiation oncology department. Team building, collaboration, and communication techniques span disciplines, and they also need to be tailored to the audience to optimize the relationship building that is critical to working together successfully. Herein, data and ideas are presented regarding effective teams. Recommendations are suggested regarding specific communication considerations for clinical and research teams, as well as professional relationships external to the organization. Success begins with recruiting and hiring diverse teams, fostering an environment that makes space for all to participate without a single dominant voice, and recognizing the skills and opportunities of all members. The importance of professionally addressing conflict is also addressed.
Article
Full-text available
Our study suggests that a practice of intelligent appropriation of digital transformation within business organizations is possible when it results from a collective support implemented by a plurality of actors exercising different functions. Based on a qualitative inquiry on 20 managers and HR managers, we analyze the formal and informal practices whereby individuals and collectives take on prerogatives conventionally assigned to the HR function, contributing to support digital transformation. We thus help to clarify the conditions for HR to support digitalization and collective intelligence.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.