Group/Org Development Flashcards
Normative Decision Making Model
Vroom & Yetton, 1973
Vroom & Yetton (1973)
Autocratic
A1 – leader decides for others, no input.
A2 – get info from others, leader decides
Consultative
C1 – give info on problem and solicit ideas and suggestions from individuals; leader decides.
C2 - give info on problem and solicit ideas and suggestions from group; leader decides.
Group consensus
G – consensus
Questions: need for buy-in, need for quality, time consideration, subordinate conflict likely an issue
Learning organization
Description
Theorist (date)
5 Behaviors of a learning org
Learning organization (Garvin, 1993) Adapts quickly to need for change Makes processes for problem solving etc.
- Systematic problem solving: scientific method, not intuition
- Experimentation w/ new approaches – continual small experiments
- Learn from experience
- Learn from others’ experience
- Transfer knowledge
Organizational Climate and Culture
Organizational Climate: (Glisson and James, 2002)
- perceptions of work environment, jobs, co-workers, pay, promotion opportunities, expectations, etc.
- Composite of individual psychological climate – perceptions of work conditions, co-workers, pay, etc.
Organizational Culture (Schein, 1990)
- Organizational norms, rules, ways of doing things that are then perceived in different ways.
- Culture and climate are mutually influenceable
Strategic Archetypes (Models for structuring business)
Miles & Snow’s strategic Archetypes (2003)
1. Defenders: companies that are active in a mature and stable competitive domain, and defend their position/market share mainly through technological efficiency.
2. Prospectors: companies that actively and continuously search for new opportunities, through the development of new products and services. They change business environments. They promote creativity, often over efficiency.
3. Analyzers: companies that operate simultaneously in two different competitive domains: a stable domain, in which they try to defend their position, and a domain in flux, in which they try to minimize risks, using strategic planning techniques. They have to find the right balance (differentiation) between both efficiency and flexibility.
4. Reactors: companies that do not have a clear corporate strategy, and lack effective response to competitive challenges. They simply react to external stimuli (competitors, legislation, etc.) trying to adapt themselves to the changing environment.
Double loop learning
double loop learning (Argyris and Schon, 1978)
Single loop learning responds to a problem, but does not correct the mentality that created it. Double loop learning addresses mindset and value systems that created it, so problems do not happen again. Einstein, I think, said that to solve a problem, it takes an intelligence greater than the one that created it.
Double loop learning is related to systems (social intelligence) approach to change.
Opposing views: what is the criticism of Hofstede’s five dimensions of culture?
Hofstede’s (1980a) work has been criticized for:
reducing culture to an overly simplistic four or five dimension conceptualization; limiting the sample
to a single multinational corporation; failing to capture the malleability of culture over time; and
ignoring within-country cultural heterogeneity (Sivakumar and Nakata, 2001).
In spite of criticism,
researchers have favored this five-dimension framework because of its clarity, parsimony,
and resonance with managers. Yet, even given the proliferation of studies incorporating the framework,
there have been few attempts to summarize the empirical findings it has generated.
Explain Hofstede collectivism and individualism dimensions
The first is IND–COL, with IND defined as ‘a loosely knit social framework in which people are supposed to take care of themselves and of their immediate
families only’,
while COL ‘is characterized by a tight social framework in which people distinguish between ingroups and outgroups, they expect their ingroup to look after them, and in exchange for
that they feel they owe absolute loyalty to it’(Hofstede, 1980b, 45).
Collectivism I: degree to which individuals are integrated into groups within the society.
Collectivism II: degree to which individuals have strong ties to their small immediate groups
The difference between Climate and Culture. Define them.
Climate versus Culture:
Climate: Generally is concerned with how workers perceive the environment in which they work. Degrees of work satisfaction.
Culture : Generally is concerned with the procedures and processes in place. Organizational politics is generally culture related. The context in which the worker operates day to day.
Explain Hofstede’s Uncertainty Avoidance Dimension
Third, uncertainty avoidance (UA) is defined as ‘the extent to which a society feels threatened by uncertain and ambiguous situations and tries to
avoid these situations by providing greater career stability, establishing more formal rules, not tolerating deviant ideas and behaviors, and believing in absolute truths and the attainment of expertise’
(1980b, 45).
Explain Hofstede’s Power Distance dimension
The second dimension is power
distance (PD), defined as ‘the extent to which a society accepts the fact that power in institutions
and organizations is distributed unequally’ (1980b, 45).
Explain the later 5th dimension of culture
Michael Harris Bond (Chinese Culture Connection, 1987) and later Hofstede and Bond (1988) developed a fifth dimension, Confucian dynamism (or long-term vs
short-term orientation).
Long-term orientation refers to future-oriented values such as persistence
and thrift, whereas short-term orientation refers to past- and present-oriented values such as respect for tradition and fulfilling social obligations.
Explain Hofstede’s masculine femininity dimensions
The fourth dimension is masculinity (MAS)–femininity (FEM), with MAS defined as ‘the
extent to which the dominant values in society are ‘‘masculine’’ – that is, assertiveness, the acquisition
of money and things, and not caring for others, the quality of life, or people’ (1980b, 46) and FEM defined as the opposite of MAS.
Action Learning, Action Research
Description: Action research from Lewin spawned two strategies: action learning in Europe (Revans) and action science in US (Argyris)
Action learning describes a developmental approach, used in a group setting but affecting the individual and organizational levels of experience that seeks to apply and generate theory from real work situations.
Action science is an intervention approach, also aimed at the individual, team, and organizational levels of experience, for helping learners increase their effectiveness in social situations through heightened awareness of the assumptions behind their actions and interactions.
Theory applied to directly to the field, researchers and practitioners collaborating.
Constructs: n/a
Context:
Organizational learning, knowledge creation, group theory, leadership development, HRD, group problem solving, intervention methodology
Key Thinkers: Kurt Lewin, Chris Argyris (US), Reg Revans (Europe), Michael Marquardt
Instrument(s): n/a
Literature:
Marquardt, M. J. (2000). Action learning and leadership. The Learning Organization, 7(5), 233-240.
Marquardt, M. (2004). Harnessing the power of action learning. T & D, 58(6), 26-32.
Revans, R. W. (2008). Sketches in action learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 11(1) pp. 23-27.
Critiques:
Ralph D. Stacy’s critique of systems theory argues that neither an individual nor a group can genuinely step outside to analyze a ‘system’ since complexity theory asserts that the very nature of their interaction generates constant change and re-formation of the social setting.
Significance
Cultural: Action learning approach may be difficult to apply in power distant cultures.
Global: “Action learning can be effective in developing leaders in all fields of endeavor, in all cultures, and at all levels because it is so flexible and adaptive.” (Marquardt, 2000, p. 239)
Scriptural: James 2:17 – dead faith without works, genuine belief results in action; faith is expressed in community, problem solving together
Theory of Motivation
Description:
Motivation is the antecedent to productivity. Motivation is the individual desire and willingness to exert effort toward attaining job performance. (Ivancevich, et al., 2008).
Content approach to motivation study: focus on factors within the person that energize, direct, sustain, and stop behavior (Maslow, Herzberg, Alderfer, McClelland)
Process approach to motivation study: describes, explains, and analyzes how behavior is energized, directed, sustained, and stopped. (Ivancevich, et al., p. 113) (Vroom, Adams, Locke)
Constructs:
direction (individual’s choice when offered alternatives);
intensity (strength of response when choice made); and
persistence (staying power of behavior)
Context:
Organizational learning, training and development, HRD, addictive behavior, productivity
Key Thinkers:
A. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
F. Herzberg’s hygiene factors (intrinsic – extrinsic)
Alderfer’s ERG (existence, relatedness, growth)
McClellands Learned needs – need for achievement, affiliation, and power
Victor Vroom – expectancy theory – people motivated by perceiving that their successful performance will result in desired rewards.
John S. Adams - equity theory (1963) – employees treated fairly and evenly for similar performance
Edwin Locke – goal-setting theory – goals are the conscious determinants of behavior.
Instrument(s):
Literature:
Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. T. (2008). Organization behavior and management (8th ed.). New York: Mcgraw-Hill/Irwin.
Critiques:
Significance
Cultural Significance:
Global Significance:
All peoples are motivated. The manager’s task is to understand the unique motivation of employee.
Scriptural Significance
Phil 3:8 – count everything loss compared to knowing Christ
Phil 3:14 - Christ-centered motivation – “the upward call of God in Christ Jesus”
7 Elements of Org Climate
Burton, R. M., Lauridsen, J., & Obel, B. (2004). The impact of organizational climate and strategic fit on firm performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 67-82.
MELTS-CR
BLO (authors); MELTS-CR
- Morale
- Equity of Rewards
- Leader credibility
- Trust
- Scapegoating
- Conflict
- Resistance to Change
The level of these seven qualities of org climate contribute to success of an organization.
