This Woolley paper [0] cited in the article gives three reasons for effective teams. The NYT only tells you two behaviors. True enough. The third is not a behavior. It is &quot;the proportion of females in the group&quot;.<p>Paper says &quot;Finally, c was positively and significantly
correlated with the proportion of females in the
group (r = 0.23, P = 0.007). However, this result
appears to be largely mediated by social sensitivity
(Sobelz = 1.93, P = 0.03), because (consistent
with previous research) women in our sample
scored better on the social sensitivity measure
than men [t(441) = 3.42, P = 0.001]. In a regression
analysis with the groups for which all three
variables (social sensitivity, speaking turn variance,
and percent female) were available, all had
similar predictive power for c, although only
social sensitivity reached statistical significance
(b = 0.33, P = 0.05).&quot;<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cs.cmu.edu&#x2F;~ab&#x2F;Salon&#x2F;research&#x2F;Woolley_et_al_Science_2010-2.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cs.cmu.edu&#x2F;~ab&#x2F;Salon&#x2F;research&#x2F;Woolley_et_al_Scie...</a>