Final answer:
The statement that work groups exhibit more synergy than work teams is false; teams are typically more synergistic. The team halo effect causes teams to appear more effective than they might actually be, and majority rule can fail with multiple options. Collective action problems are less severe in small groups for multiple reasons.
Step-by-step explanation:
The main answer to the statement 'Work groups tend to exhibit more synergy than work teams' is B) False. Work teams generally exhibit more synergy because they consist of individuals with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. Groups may not have the same level of commitment to common objectives or the sense of mutual accountability found in teams.Regarding the team halo effect, one effect is that teams appear to work better than they do. Essentially, when the team halo effect is in place, the collective output of a team is perceived to be of higher quality or effectiveness merely due to the existence of a team structure, even if this doesn't reflect their actual performance.It is also important to understand that majority rule might not always lead to a consensus when multiple choices are present. The statement 'Majority rule can fail to produce a single preferred outcome when there are more than two choices' is True, as it may result in a lack of decisive outcomes due to a split in preferences.Finally, collective action problems are indeed less severe in small groups for reasons such as stronger peer pressure and easier monitoring of individual behavior. Therefore, the best answer regarding the severity of collective action problems in small groups is d. All of the above.