O Flashcards
describe self-directed teams
- Group of empowered individuals working together to reach a common goal
- May be organized for long-term or short-term objectives
Effective because
- Provide employee empowerment
- Ensure core job characteristics
- Meet individual psychological needs
self directed teams: how to maximize effectiveness
Ensure those who have legitimate contributions are on the team
Provide management support
Ensure the necessary training
Endorse clear objectives and goals
Financial and non-financial rewards
Supervisors must release control
Benefits of teams and expanded job designs
Improved quality of work life Improved job satisfaction Increased motivation Allows employees to accept more responsibility Improved productivity and quality Reduced turnover and absenteeism
discuss construct validity as it relates to an O topic. Discuss implications for measurement and model building.
MTMM is often used to establish construct validity in org research in order to take into account sources of error variance. MTTM helps to validate measures and evaluate how error affects the measurement of a construct. Some error in measurement can be attributed to method variance, and some to random error, which MTMM helps disentangle. However, here is no clear, agreed upon procedure for analyzing and interpreting MTMM matrices. Thus, the same data may produce different conclusions. Each method is built on different assumptions and is appropriate in different situations. This poses a problem in applying this method in organizational research. The magnitudes of the differences between correlations is not addressed in MTMM, and the amount of variance in measurement due to method is considered to be constant across the data; this is an important discrepancy because the magnitude of the differences between correlations provides information about the degree of discriminant validity that is present. Finally, there is no way to partial out the variation in measures due to different sources (traits, methods, random error). Thus, this procedure may be limited in its utility because of Type I and Type II errors that have the potential to result from its application.
Another common method is to use key informants. Key informants provide org researchers with information on organizational structure, environment, social climate. However, this method has been criticized due to the potential for measurement error in key informant reports. The process of serving as a key informant can be complex and relies heavily on individual judgment. Although an informant may attempt to provide objective information, their inferences about the organizational environment will be construed through their personal experiences. Thus, this task is anything but objective; measurement error related to this subjectivity is a major problem. There is little evidence offered on the validity of this method.
What is the answer to this issue, then? CFA is one way to ameliorate the issues associated with various methods of establishing construct validity in organizational research. There are fewer assumptions associated with CFA and there is more information provided about reliability and validity than the other methods. Variance is partitioned out and an overall degree of fit is provided. Inferences made are based on statistical criteria, such as the chi square test, rather than rules of thumb or qualitative inferences.
importance of employee attitudes
employees who are satisfied and committed more likely to attend work, stay with organization, engage in OCBs and ethical behaviors; less likely to engage in CWBs
relationship between job sat and performance
The relationship between job sat (JS) and performance is not consistent across jobs or people
Complex jobs = relationship is stronger between JS and performance
The relationships between JS and comm, attendance, performance, turnover are not as strong as you would expect, but this is probably due to the fact that there are so many other factors that affect work behaviors (e.g., you want to miss work but can’t cause you need money, want to leave the job but can’t cause of the job market)
Thus, job sat and commitment is related more to the desire to turnover or miss work that they are to actual behaviors
What causes employees to be satisfied with and committed to their jobs?
These attitudes are multifaceted;
A person may be satisfied with some aspects of their job but not others
individual differences, core self-evaluations, culture, intelligence, satisfaction with other aspects of life, meeting employees expectations about the job, person-org fit and person job fit, nature of tasks, rewards, chance for growth and challenge
describe the construct of commitment
Three motivational facets to commitment
Affective: extent to which an employee wants to remain with an org
Continuance: extent to which an employee believes she must remain with the org due to time, expense, effort already put in/difficulty in finding another job
Normative: extent to which an employee feels obligated to the org and must remain with them (an org has invested a lot in them so they feel ethically obligated to remain)
individual differences that affect job satisfaction
Individual difference theory:
some variability in job sat is due to an individual’s personal tendency across situations to enjoy what she does
Certain people will be generally satisfied and motivated regardless of the type of job they hold
Research supports the notion that job sat is consistent across time and situations within people
Core self-evaluations & job satisfaction
Four personality variables are especially likely to be related to people’s predisposition for job sat (Judge, Locke, Durham, 1997)
Emotional stability
Self-esteem
Self-efficacy
Internal locus of control
Meta analyses (Judge & Bono, 2001) found these four variables related to job sat and performance
Intelligence relationship to job satisfaction
Research suggests that smarter people have slightly lower job satisfaction levels for non-complex jobs
In complex jobs, the relationship between intelligence and job sat is negligible
Intelligence and turnover not related
How can an org influence job satisfaction?
An employee’s needs can be met in a variety of nonword actives such as hobbies and volunteer work
An org should work toward fulfilling the needs that it can control
Employee expectations about the job & job satisfaction
Discrepancy between employee needs, values, and expectations vs. reality of the job = more dissatisfaction and less motivation
It’s important that applicants have realistic job expectations
When psychological contract is breached, job sat and org commitment go down and intentions to turnover increase
role of tasks and co workers in job satisfaction
Nature of work itself is a very important factor in job sat
People who enjoy who they work with have higher job sat
measuring job sat & commitment
most orgs use their own custom designed inventories, but commonly used ones include Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) for JS
and for JC, Allen & Meyer (1990) is most commonly used
consequences of dissatisfaction and other negative work attitudes
absenteeism, turnover, CWBs
how to decrease absenteeism
Well pay (paying employees for unused sick days) is the top way to decrease absenteeism
Financial bonus, games, PTO, recognition programs also effective
Effects of turnover
The effect of turnover on org performance is mediated by the strength of an org’s HR efforts. Turnover will most affect orgs that don’t invest in their employees
Reducing Turnover
Administer attitude surveys or do exit interviews
Understand that turnover is a process of disengagement from the org that takes days, weeks, months
Consider fit during selection process
Prevent unmet expectations: use RJPs, referrals, provide good environment and opportunities for advancement, competitive pay
Focus on improving job embeddedness
Job embeddedness
Job embeddedness is the extent to which an employee has links to their jobs and community, the importance of the these links, and how easy they could be broken and reestablished elsewhere
Higher levels of embeddedness = less turnover
describe leader emergence
People who become leaders possess traits or characteristics different from people who do not become leaders
Research indicates that to some extent, people are born with a desire to lead or not lead
We inherit certain traits and abilities that might influence our decision to seek leadership
individual differences and leadership
High conscientiousness, openness, extraversion, masculinity, creativity and authoritarianism and low in neuroticism are more likely to be leaders
High self monitors are more likely to lead, and More intelligent people are more likely to lead
research on motivation to lead
At first research indicated that traits weren’t strongly associated with leadership but later on we figured out that it’s probably because motivation to lead is very complex
motivation to lead: factors
Three motivational factors of leadership
Affective ID: enjoy being in charge and leading others
Noncalculative: perceive that leadership will result in personal gain
Social-Normative: sense of duty to lead
People high in these motivational factors tend to obtain leadership experience and have confidence in their leadership skills
Things that play a role in leader performance
traits/individual differences, cognitive ability, needs, gender, task vs. person orientation, initiating structure
leader performance: traits
extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness were positively related to leader performance
management, decision making, and oral communication skills —-> leadership effectiveness
High self monitors —-> leader performance: Has more to do with what leaders do vs. what traits they possess (e.g., a leader might have the trait of shyness but outwardly be more open because it’s important to their job)
Some research on trait theory suggests that certain traits are necessary requirements for leadership excellence but that they don’t guarantee it
leader performance: cognitive ability
moderate correlation between cognitive ability and leadership performance
Cognitive ability is most important when the leader is not distracted by stressful situations and uses a more directive e leadership style
leader performance: needs
Need for power, achievement, and affiliation
Need for achievement —> leader performance
Leadership motive pattern: High need for power, low need for affiliation —> high performing managers
Effective leaders should be more concerned about results vs. being well liked by others
Leaders shouldn’t place their need to be liked above the needs and goals of the organization
leader performance: task vs. person orientation
Three major schools of that have postulated that differences in leader performance can be attributed to differences in the extent to which leaders are task vs person oriented
Task centered leaders
Leaders who define and structure their roles as well as the roles of their subordinates
Theory X leaders
Believe that employees are extrinsically motivated and thus lead by giving directives and setting goals
leader performance: initiating structure
Extent to which leaders define and structure their roles and the roles of their subordinates
leader performance: unsuccessful leaders
Poor leader behavior has three major causes
Lack of leadership training given to supervisors :
Norm is to promote employees from within or hire new one directly to role
Cognitive Deficiencies :
Poor leaders unable to learn from experience and unable to think strategically; they repeat the same mistakes a lot
Personality
Many unsuccessful leaders are insecure and have one of three personality types
paranoid/passive aggressive, high likability floater, narcissist
describe contingency model of leadership
Leader performance depends on traits x situation; this theory is a situational favorability theory
Any individual’s leadership style is effective only in certain situations
Individual leadership style is not easily changed
Leadership training should concentrate on helping people understand their style of leadership and learn how to manipulate a situation so that the two align
Favorableness of a situation is determined by 3 variables :
More Task structuredness = more favorable
More Leader position power = more favorable
More positive leader-member relations = more favorable
Research has generally supported this theory
leader effectiveness: subordinate ability
Abilities and attitudes of followers influence leader effectiveness by interacting with style and characteristics of the leader
Describe the path-goal theory of leadership
Leader behaviors are accepted to the extent to which it helps subordinates achieve their goals
Supervisors adjust their behaviors to meet the needs of subordinates and this changes via the situation
A leader can adopt one of four behavioral leadership styles to handle each situation; each style will only work in certain situations
followers’ satisfaction and motivation as important theoretical mechanisms involved in the relation between leadership and follower performance, integrates OLS behaviors as a basis
not strongly empirically supported
discuss LMX theory of leadership
Concentrates on interactions between leaders and subordinates vs. in terms of situations and abilities
Leaders develop different roles and relationships with the people under them and thus act differently with different subordinates (in group or out group)
Employees with high quality LMX = high job sat, higher performance, less likely to turn over, more OCB
theory is supported, But the relationship is complicated because of differences in perceptions of the LMX:
Number of employees being supervised and impression management attempts by employees moderate the relationship between LMX and performance
behavioral theories of leadership
it falls under skills theories;
Leaders initiate ideas, informally interact with subordinates, stand up for and support subordinates, take responsibility, etc.
These theories aren’t often described in textbooks but is often the way leadership is practiced in orgs
In an applied sense, this means that we should ID leader behaviors within an org and then develop or train individuals to become effective leaders, either through experience or formal training
Leadership through decision making
Only in certain situations decisions are decisions best mad by the leader; in others, its best to involve subordinates, colleagues, or both
Leadership through Walking Around
Management by Walking Around (MBWA)
Increases communication, helps build relationships, encourages employee participation
Leadership through Power
Able to get more resources and dictate policy
describe transactional leadership theory
Task-focused behaviors like performance monitoring and consequences for performance
Three dimensions
Contigent reward; Leaders reward followers for engaging in desired behaviors
Management by exception-active:
Leaders who actively monitor performance and take corrective action when needed
Management by exception-passive :
Don’t actively monitor performance and only take corrective action when it’s serious
Discuss transformational leadership (TL) theory
Focuses on changing or transforming the goals, values, ethics, and performance of others
Visionary, charismatic, inspirational
They develop a vision and change the org to fit this vision and also motivate followers to reach the vision or long term goal
Have need to influence others, strong attitude that their beliefs and ideas are correct
Most related to the personality dimension of extraversion
Also positively related to agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience
behaviors associated with transformational leadership should serve to (i) indicate to the follower that the leader is trustworthy and (ii) emotionally attach the employee to the organization and, in turn, increase the followers’ desires to exchange the leader’s trustworthiness and good will with improved performance
Yukl (1994) guidelines for transformational leadership
Develop clear and appealing vision
Develop strategy for attaining the vision
Articulate and promote the vision
Act confident and optimistic
Express confidence in followers
Use early success in small steps to build confidence
Celebrate successes
Use dramatic, symbolic actions to emphasize key values
Lead by example
create, modify, or eliminate such cultural forms
research on TL
Yielded positive results
Judge et al 2004 meta
Strong correlations between TL and several aspects of leader effectiveness, such as follower sat, follower motivation, and group performance
But similar results for transactional
Bass 1997: TL is the most liked form of leadership and Is practiced across cultures
Hunt & Laing (1997)
Too much effort has been expended in trying to label leaders as transformational or charismatic
Proposed that excellent leadership should be defined by exemplar; is a leader similar to successful leaders or not
Good leaders possess 5 characteristics
Vision, differentiation from followers, values, communicate vision and values to others, flaws
leadership: where are we today?
Each theory has some truth, and the best theory about leadership is really some combination of the theories
Taken together, research indicates that leadership emerges as a set of interactions between:
A leader’s traits and skills
Individuals likely to be successful leaders if they
Have received leadership training and mastered leadership skills
High self monitors
High in both task and person orientations
Have leadership motive pattern (high need for power, low need for affiliation)
Are intelligent
Are emotionally stable
Possess skills and personality to be a TL
A situation’s demands and characteristics
IF an individual has the above, the their leadership performance will depend on the characteristics of the situation
Certain people will be effective leaders in certain situations when particular types of people are followers
Individuals who have a wide variety of relevant skills will one best able to be effective leaders in a larger variety of situations
Leaders who are able to adapt their interpersonal styles to fit the needs of followers will be better leaders than those who stick to just one behavioral style
It is important that the leader be able to understand the needs of the situation, the follower, or both and then behave accordingly
Follower’s needs and characteristics
Leaders who accurately recognize situational and follower needs will be more effective than those who do not
The importance of leadership :
Leadership affects org performance
Relates to job sat, commitment, intention to turnover, and OCBs
In general, the various theories suggest that employees will be highly motivated if
Predisposed via personality
Expectations have been met
Job and org are consistent with their values
Have been given achievable goals
Receive feedback on their goal attainment
Org rewards them for goal achievement
Employees perceive they’re being treated fairly
Coworkers demonstrate a high level of motivation
individual differences and work motivation
Four individual differences that are most related to work motivation are personality, self esteem, intrinsic motivation tendency, and need for achievement
Personality & work motivation
Conscientiousness best personality predictor of work performance & OCB
Extraversion most highly correlated with number of promotions received
work motivation: self esteem
consistency theory: Self esteem is a motivator to perform well on the job
Positive correlation beween self esteem and performance
High self esteem employees desire to perform at high levels and employees with low self esteem desire to perform at low levels
Chronic self esteem, situational (self-efficacy), and socially influenced
motivation: consistency theory: research & application
Research supports consistency theory
Self esteem —> motivation
Self esteem —> job performance .26 (Judge and Bono, 2001 meta)
On the basis of consistency theory, we should be able to increase performance by increasing employee self esteem and research supports this idea
Interventions designed to increase self esteem or self efficacy greatly increase job performance
Self Esteem Workshops that give insights into employee strengths raise self esteem and self efficacy
Train supervisors to communicate a feeling of confidence in employees
Manager confidence —> self esteem increase—> performance increase
Managers treat employees according to their own expectations of the employee’s performance
intrinsic motivation: work motivation
Enjoy performing the actual tasks or the challenge of successfully completing the task
Don’t need external rewards like pay or praise; in fact pay might actually decrease it
There is a debate among researchers who believe that rewards reduce intrinsic motivation and those who don’t
work motivation: needs for achievement & power
employees differ in the extent wo which the are motivated by thinned for achievement, affiliation, and power
work motivation: self-regulating behavior
The extent to which an employee will be successful depends on the employer’s ability to wisely select and set goals as well as his or her ability to monitor and adjust goals
work motivation: meeting expectations of employees
How well the job aligns with what the employee wants, values, and expects affects how motivated and satisfied an employee will be with their job
Employees come in with certain expectations of what the job should be like based on what recruiters tell them and other factors like experience or what they’ve heard; when this doesn’t align with the actual job motivation decreases
Highlights importance of RJPs
Employees compare what the org promises to do for them vs what they actually do, can retaliate if org doesn’t deliver
work motivation: job characteristics theory
Employees desire jobs that are meaningful, provide them opportunity to be autonomous, and provide them with feedback of results of efforts
Jobs have motivation potential if they allow employees to use a variety of skills and connect their efforts to an outcome (task identification) that has meaning and is useful
work motivation: needs, values, & wants
Misalignment between needs, values, and wants vs. what a job offers leads to low levels of motivation and satisfaction
work motivation: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
Has lost popularity but is still relevant for organizations on a basic level
Basic biological needs
Safety needs
Job security, org financial stability, and feeling safe in the work environment are extremely important
Social Needs
Company get togethers or sporting events
Ego Needs
Praise, awards, promotion, salary, etc.
Self-Actualization Needs
Doing the same job over and over may decrease motivation through job dissatisfaction (e.g., working on an assembly line for 10 years)
Providing employees with recognition, enrichment, and a safe workplace increases motivation and satisfaction. Primary reason why Maslow’s theory is still used in practice even though not favored in academia
work motivation: goal setting
Goal setting increases motivation
Most successful way to set goals is to use the SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time bound) method :
Specific
Properly set goals are concrete and specific (Locke & Latham, 2002)
“I will print 500 pages within the next hour” vs. “I will print as many pages as I can”
Measurable
Difficult but Attainable
Properly set goals are high but attainable
Employees will quit trying if a goal is set too high
People differ in how they set goals
People high in conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness and low in agreeableness and neuroticism set high goals
Relevant
Time Bound
Employee participation in goal setting increases the commitment to reaching the goal, but Simply participating in goal setting does not increase performance
work motivation: goal progress feedback
Feedback increases the effectiveness of goal setting
Must be given for good behaviors along with the bad
work motivation: rewards
Providing incentives can increase motivation
Operant conditioning principles are at the heart of this
Employees will engage in behaviors for which they are rewarded and avoid behaviors for which they are punished; this is a very effective method of increasing motivation
factors to consider in determining effectiveness of an incentive program
timing, contingency of consequences, type of incentive used, individual vs. group incentives
expectancy theory
Expectancy (E): perceived relationship between amount of effort an employee puts in and the resulting outcome
Instrumentality (I): extent to which the outcome of a workers’ performance, if noticed, results in a particular consequence
Valence (V): extent to which an employee values a particular consequence
Motivation = E(I x V)
All possible outcomes of a behavior are determined and then the valence of each is multiplied by the probability that it occurs at a particular performance level, and then the sum of these products is multiplied by the expectancy of an employee putting in the effort to attain the necessary level of performance
The higher the score on each component, the greater the employee’s motivation to perform
The theory is most predictive when people behave rationally and when they have internal locus of control
Can be used to suggest ways to change employee motivation
Criticisms are usually about the formula, that things need to be added to it instead of multiplying
work motivation: rewards vs. punishment
Punishment needs to fit the crime
Both reward and punishment affect employee behavior and attitudes, but the magnitude of the effect is much stronger for rewards
equity theory
Our levels of motivation and job satisfaction are related to how fairly we believe we are treated in comparison with others
If we believe we are being treated unfairly, we attempt to change our beliefs or behaviors until the situation appears to be fair
Three components involved in the perception of fairness
Inputs: personal elements we put into our jobs (e.g., time, effort, education, experience, distance driven to work)
outputs: elements we receive from our job (pay, benefits, challenge, responsibility)
We subconsciously compute an input/output ratio and compare them to those of other employees
Employees can seek greater output by asking for a raise or decreasing their input
Equity theory was springboard for modern research on organizational justice
integration of motivation theories (put it all together)
People come to a job with a predisposition towards motivation (Individual Differences Consistency Theory)
High self esteem, high need for achievement, intrinsic motivation are more motivated in general
We will be motivated if the job itself and the organization meet our expectations and values and satisfy our needs (Discrepancy & Needs theories)
Employees who have, understand, and agree to goals will be more motivated (Goal-Setting theory)
Goals must be challenging and reasonable (Goal Setting & Expectancy theories)
Extrinsically motivated people will be more motivated if behavior results in a reward (Operant Learning & Expectancy theories)
Awards must have value to the employee to be motivating; different people value different rewards, and care must be taken to ensure that a variety of rewards are available (expectancy, discrepancy theories)
Rewards that are valued will be motivating only if they are given in an equitable way; perceptions of equality are as important as the reality of equity (Equity Theory)
If other employees are motivated, there is an increased probability that we will model their behavior and be motivated too (Social Influence Theory)
Stages of Org Change: Lewin 1958
Unfreezing: org must convince employees and stakeholders that current state of affairs is unacceptable and that change is necessary
Moving: org takes steps to move the org to the desired state
Refreezing: org develops ways to keep the new changes in place
Stages of Change: Carnall 2008
Denial: create reasons why the proposed change won’t work
Defense: justify their positions and current ways of doing things; if change is occurring, employees figure they’re doing something wrong
Discarding: realize change is inevitable and old ways must be discarded
Adaptation: employees test new system, learn how it functions, and make adjustments to their performance
Internalization: immersed in new culture and have accepted their new coworkers and work environment
important factors in employee acceptance of org change
type of change reason for change person making change people being changed way change is implemented organizational/departmental culture employee empowerment regarding the change
why is employee acceptance a challenge in org change?
Employees often initially resistant
Enjoy old way of doing things
Fear that change will result in less favorable working conditions
Fear their skills may not be valued
Fear of being able to adapt to the new change
types of org change
Evolutionary: continuous improvement
Revolutionary: major change, jolt to the system, more drastic; most difficult
importance of reasons for org change
Least likely to accept the change if they do not understand it or were not told about why the change is being implemented
when are workers most positive about org change?
When the source of change is within the work group rather than external
Leader making change is respected, well liked, and has history of success
person being changed: types
Change agents: enjoy change
Change analysts: only want change if it’s going to make a positive difference
Receptive changers: probably won’t instigate the change but are willing to go along with it
Essential for an org
Usually people with high self esteem, optimism, and internal locus of control
Reluctant changers: don’t instigate or welcome change, but will change if necessary
implementing change: creating an atmosphere for change
Need to create dissatisfaction for current system/status quo
Survey employees to determine how satisfied they are with the current system
Will often reveal employees aren’t satisfied with current way of doing things
Share results with employees to make them more willing to change
Then, orgs need to work to reduce the fear of change by providing emotional support, allowing employees to vent and discuss their feelings, and letting employees feel as though they can make mistakes during transition period
Describe benefits of change to employees
implementing change: communicating the details
Employees are most responsive when kept well informed
Communicating change, training those making the communication to deal with hostility and resistance, and being honest with employees
implementing change: time frame
Longer it takes, more opportunity there is for something to go wrong
Should not remain in “change mode” for more than 2 years
implementing change: training needs
Train employees on new system
implementing change: role of org culture
Each department has subculture that affects how they react to change
Most changes require alteration to both the overall culture and the subculture
implementing change: changing the culture
Hold on to successful elements of present culture and add new elements that are important
implementing change: assessing the new culture: how to
Step 1: Needs Assessment
Current culture must be analyzed and compared with the desired culture to determine what might need to change
Review current practices relating to the change
Data usually collected via observations, review of existing documentation, employee interviews and surveys
Step 2: Determining Executive Direction
Analyze the needs assessment to determine decisions or actions that will reinforce the culture and to assess the feasibility of certain changes
Step 3: Implementation Considerations
How will the new culture be implemented?
Committees, ad hoc groups set up to carry out changes or will management execute changes?
Allow employees to participate in implementation
Step 4: Training
Train employees in new philosophy for the new culture
Can reduce ambiguity/confusion surrounding the different interpretations of change by managers vs. employees
Step 5: Evaluation of New Culture
Address whether old norms and proceeders still exist or if the change has actually occurred
implementing change: creating dissatisfaction with the current culture
Communicate to employees the future impact of continuing to do things the way they’re currently done
Create necessary displeasure with status quo
Distribute attitude surveys that ask people how satisfied they are with the org’s goal and to suggest ideas for changes and distribute those results
Commitment from all levels is needed - seek employee input in the process
implementing change: maintaining new culture
Reward employees for successfully participating and cooperating with new system
Recognition, pay for performance, etc.
implementing change: selection of employees
Select future employees on the basis of how well the epitomize the new culture
Otherwise, old ways will return
Organizational socialization of new employees
org change: factors in determining when employees should be involved in decision making
Importance of decision quality (time or effort spent making the decision)
Leader knowledge of problem area
Do leaders have sufficient information to make decision alone?
If yes, consultation with others is desired only if leaders want their subordinates to feel involved
Structure of the problem
Extent to which leader knows what info is needed and how it can be obtained
Importance of decision acceptance
How important is it that the decision is accepted by others?
Probability of Decision Acceptance
If leader is popular and viewed as competent, acceptance more likely
Subordinate trust & motivation
Motivated to achieve the organizational goals
Probability of subordinate conflict
If probability is high, might be better for leader to simply seek input and then make decision alone
org change: levels of employee input
trust & autonomy increases as more empowerment is given
Following
No real control, given instruction about what to do and how to do it
Lots of quality control by supervisor
Might be new or inexperienced employees
Ownership of Own Product
Still told what to do but are solely responsible for quality of output
Advisory
Asked to provide feedback, suggestions, and input
Org might not follow it but will consider it
Makes good business sense - employees should be most knowledgable about their own jobs
Shared/Participative/Team
Decision made at group level
Rare that team’s decision is not implemented
At this level employees must be trained on how to make decisions and also willing to take on decision-making responsibilities
Absolute
Absolute authority to make decision on their own
Some employees may be leery about this
So orgs need to remove this feeling of uneasiness if possible
Must receive training
Discuss mistakes rather than punish for them
org communication: attitude surveys
Only useful if the org actually takes the results seriously
Not beneficial if a problem is discovered and nothing is done with employee feedback
Must share all of results if results are shared at all
improving employee communication skills
Training workshops are common, but improvement is usually short term
definition of a team
Not all groups are considered teams
a work team is “a collection of three or more individuals who interact intensively to provide an organizational product, plan, decision, or service”
teams: types of tasks
Additive = group’s performance is equal to the sum of the performances by each group member
o Conjunctive = group’s performance dependent upon least effective group member
o Disjunctive = group’s performance is based on the most talented group member (e.g., problem solving, brainstorming)
teams: list factors that affect group performance
cohesion homogeneity membership stability isolation outside pressure group status group ability and efficacy personality communication group roles social facilitation groupthink
teams: group cohesion
The extent to which group members like and trust one another, are committed to accomplishing a team goal, and share a feeling of group pride
Cohesion isn’t necessary for ultimate group success, but research consensus is that it’s good for performance if it’s not too high
More cohesion means
Better performance, better decision quality, higher member satisfaction, more member interaction, more employee courtesy
BUT cohesion can also be detrimental to performance if it is too high
• Groups lose sight of organizational goals
• Conform to norms of lower performance even though they can do a lot better
teams: group homogeneity
Important to consider when assigning groups
Mixed results found on whether it’s good for performance
Slightly heterogeneous groups appear to be good
teams: group size
Larger groups = lower productivity
• But are best for additive tasks or disjunctive tasks
5 members appears to be a good number
• Perform best
• BUT this is only for certain types of tasks
o Conjunctive are best for smaller groups
teams: group status & how to increase perception of it
Higher group status = higher cohesion
They just have to believe that they have high status in order to see increases in cohesion
Leaders can increase cohesion via group status by
• Increasing perception that the group is difficult to join
• Group activities are perceived as special
teams: group ability & confidence
Higher group efficacy (specific tasks) = better performance
Higher group potency (in general) = better performance
teams: group member personality
Groups with members who have higher openness to experience and higher emotional stability = better performance
Cognitive ability matters most for intellectual tasks
teams: communication structure
Best network structure depends on situation and goals of the group
• When goal is solve a problem as quickly as possible, centralized network is best
• Good leaders consider this and thus choose the communication network that best fits the facilitation of reaching the goals for the group
teams: group roles
For a group to be successful, its members’ roles must fall into one of two categories
• Task oriented or social oriented
Usually naturally filled by members’ personalities
• High in conscientiousness = task-oriented roles
• High in agreeableness = social oriented roles
Will be assigned by leader if not naturally filled
teams: when to construct a team vs. let employees work individually
If the task is complex or not well learned, employees should work alone
If the task I easy or well learned, and each individual’s performance can be identified, working in groups is best
If task involves creativity, members should work independently and then come together to discuss
Electronic brainstorming groups perform better than those that meet in person and it is more cost-effective
teams: Groupthink; when does it happen, and how can you decrease it?
Occurs most often when the group is
• High in cohesion, insulated from qualified outsiders, has an illusion of invulnerability, infallibility, or both, believes that it’s morally superior, is under a lot of pressure to conform, has a leader who promotes a favorite solution, has gatekeepers who keep information from other group members
How to decrease group think
• Leader shouldn’t state own position until later in decision making process
• Leader should encourage open discussion
• Separate into subgroups to increase chance of disagreement
• Group member can play devil’s advocate
factors to consider before calling a group a “team”
identification with members
interdependence: Team members need and rely on other members
power differentiation:
Members are treated as equals
Apologies are given and they are polite to each other
social distance
Social distance is decreased, casualness is encouraged among members
conflict management tactics
Respond to conflict by collaborating, making attempts to compromise with each other
negotiation process
In teams, members go for a win-win for everyone
how teams develop
Forming, storming, norming, and performing stages Remember teams articles from class indicate this isn’t always linear (Gersick’s punctuated equilibrium model)
reasons why teams don’t always work
o Team isn’t actually a team, excessive meeting requirements, lack of empowerment, lack of skill, distrust, unclear objectives
what is the overall best predictor of performance? why?
GMA
Causal analyses of the determinants of job performance show that the major effect of GMA is on the acquisition of job knowledge: People who are higher in GMA acquire more job knowledge and acquire it faster.
The amount of job-related knowledge required on even less complex jobs is much greater than is generally realized. Higher levels of job knowledge lead to higher levels of job performance.
Viewed negatively, not knowing what one should be doing—or even not knowing all that one should about what one should be doing—is detrimental to job performance. In addition, knowing what one should be doing and how to do it depends strongly on GMA.
discuss technology’s impact on employee learning and performance
• As technology advances, there may be greater opportunities for differentiation between employee levels of performance.
o Over time, more technologies have become available to employees to help them learn and perform their jobs more effectively and efficiently.
o When desktop computers first entered organizations, their functionality and purpose was limited. Over time, the number of software applications available to organizations has become almost limitless with each organization leveraging a unique mix of applications and platforms.
o Theoretically, this means that the greater proficiency an employee possesses for applications and platforms required for a given job, the better the employee should be able to perform. When jobs require proficiency in only one application, there should be less differentiation between employees’ performance than when a job requires proficiency in multiple applications.
discuss differences between PM and PA
o Performance appraisal occurs once a year and is initiated by a requires from HR, while PM occurs at much more frequent intervals and can be initiated by a supervisor OR a subordinate
o PA systems are developed by HR and handed to managers to use in evaluating their subordinates; PM is jointly developed by managers and the employees who report to them
o PA feedback occurs once each year and follows the appraisal process; PM feedback occurs whenever a supervisor or subordinate feels the need for a discussion about expectations and performance
o In PA, the role of the appraiser is to reach agreement with the employee appraised about the level of effectiveness displayed and to identify areas for improvement; in PM, the appraiser’s role is to understand the performance criteria and help the employee understand how his/her behavior fits with those criteria and to look for areas for improvement; they are attempting to come to some shared meaning about expectations and strategic value of those expectations, rather than simply clarifying the meaning of a non-strategic performance area and definitions of effectiveness in that area
o In PA, the appraisee’s role is to accept or reject the evaluation and acknowledge areas that need improvement; in PM, the role of the appraisee is identical to the role of the appraiser: to understand the performance criteria and how his/her behavior bits with those criteria
components of PM
definition of performance, including organizational objectives and strategies
measurement process (the aspect of PA)
communication between supervisor and subordinate about the extent to which individual behavior aligns with the expectations of org
advantages of PM
feedback + recognition increases the motivation to perform as well as self esteem
facilitates organizational change
enhances motivation, commitment, and intentions to stay
enhances engagement
the PM process
- pre reqs: knowledge of org mission and strategic goals + knowledge of the job
- performance planning: employee and supervisor should have knowledge of desired results/outcomes as well as behaviors. create a development plan based on these
- performance execution which must include: commitment to goals, ongoing performance feedback and coaching, communication between employee & supervisor, collecting and sharing performance data, preparing for performance reviews, supervisors must observe and document performance, give feedback
- performance assessment: both manager and employee fill out PA form; discrepancies are important for identifying areas for development
- performance review: ID what employee has done well vs. poorly by citing specific negative or positive behaviors. agree on action plan, provide recommendations for improvement that utilize employee’s skills, set up follow up meeting and what will be discussed then
- performance renewal and recontracting: use insights gained from other phases to improve
implementing a PM system
preparation: communication, appeals process, training programs, pilot testing
ongoing monitoring and evaluation
differences between CM and JA
Executives pay more attention to CM
CM often attempt to distinguish top from average performers
CM frequently include descriptions of how the competencies change or progress with employee level
CMs are usually directly linked to business objectives and strategies
CM are typically developed top-down (Start with execs)
CM may consider future job requirements either directly or indirectly
CM may be presented in a manner that facilitates ease of use (org-specific language, schematics)
CM typically identifies a finite number of competencies and applies them across multiple jobs or functions
CM are frequently used to actively align HR systems
CM are often an OD interview that seeks broad organization change as opposed to a simple data collection effort
best uses for competency modeling
Hiring Training Evaluation Promotions Development Compensation
why PA is broken and how to fix it
PA has been reduced to a purely administrative process; the focus has been taken away from the connection to day to day activities of employees ; well developed tools and systems alone are not enough to achieve effective PM. interventions to improve the process should focus on improving communication between manager and employee and aspects of the leader employee relationship
discuss the idea of star performers
they can occupy any role, established based on their output.
time is important in IDing stars because stars should show great performance over time and not just a single instance. with stars the focus is on results, which takes away from the importance of traits or how they get the job done.
the future of job performance
using non normal distributions, focusing on more variability in performance defined by the tail (a power law distribution) rather than the midpoint as is the focus of normal distributions.
increased job complexity and flexible hierarchies
practical considerations for star performance for now and in the future
allow stars to revolve in and out of teams
use network analysis to better identify the organizational antecedents that allow stars to emerge and sustain high performance
training interventions could focus more on marginally improving star performance vs. substantially improving average performance will better increase overall production
target the stars who most align with the org’s strategic core competencies
OD interventions: characteristics
planned
org-wide
managed from the top
purpose = to increase org effecitveness and health
uses behavioral science
OD interventions: how to gain top level leadership buy in
design the OD effort so that it supports or even helps identify the org strategy; this will give it a much greater chance of being resources properly
criticisms of OD
lack of clarity, lack of consistent definitions and what vs. what does not constitute an OD effort
org change: theory E and theory O
theory E: an action approach to change based on economic value; goal is maximizing revenue and worth. it focuses on structure and systems where change is systematic and comes from the top down. motivation for employees is usually in the form of financial incentives. consultants have a major role in analyzing problems and shaping solutions. used for downsizing and layoffs
theory O: goal is to develop org capabilities. money is not the primary motive, but rather making a difference. leadership is driven from the bottom up, and change is continuous. motivation is intrinsic and consultants role is minimized. used for cooperation with unions, focusing on customer satisfactions, compensatory systems aligned with org culture
application: best way is to combine them. use theory E first and then implement theory O in order to preserve the quality of org culture and justice perceptions. very hard to do both at same time, so sequencing works well
OD: diologic vs. diagnostic
Diologic: does not focus on behavior but on changing mindsets/how people think. doesn’t treat the org as a social system in which reality is socially constructed. does not formally emphasize data collection or accurate diagnosis
for what purpose is the data being collected?
what are alpha, beta, and gamma change
alpha change = actual change in behaviors or attitudes
beta change: respondent’s subjective new interpretation of the scale
gamma = reconceptualization of the measured variable which results in pre-post test measuring different constructs
ABG change: how to identify
gamma: look at congruence between factor structures of pre and post test measures via CFA; if high, no gamma change (good)
beta: changes in ideal scores from pre to posttest; look at the regression of posttest on pretest variables. if regression coefficients are unequal, beta change has occurred
alpha can be determined based on process of elimination of other two
how will O side topics be relevant in the future of work?
work engagement will be important
teams focused on cohesion and diversity
money is in idea generation; innovation necessary
leadership still relevant to motivate followers: LMX relevant
explain Kahn’s conceptualization of engagement
based on the premise that engagement is influenced by three antecedent psychological conditions: experienced meaningful- ness of work; psychological safety; and experienced availability. Kahn (1990) argues that these three con- ditions are influenced by the nature of the job, the social environment, personal resources and energy. This perspective draws on job characteristics theory (Hackman and Oldham 1976) and shows that some aspects of work design such as autonomy, feedback and task significance will generate the psychological conditions necessary for engagement
where is engagement research headed?
The field is moving to a place of more interest to managers and interventions to increase engagement, alongside subjective individual’s experiences of engagement. A significant gap still remains on engagement’s definition and discriminant construct validity; because the JDR model and UWES totally dominate the field currently, the limitations this measurement model implies are in need of clarity. longitudinal research is also needed.
trends in PM research
Designing scales that are more structured
Identifying types of rating errors
Rater training to minimize these errors
360 evaluations for developmental purposes
Rater motivation to provide accurate ratings
org culture: definition and implications
a set of shared mental assumptions that guide interpretation and action by defining appropriate behavior for various situations
implies that culture is the view of the world that the members share
implies that culture is what guides employee behavior
culture: conceptualization
three levels of culture
- artifacts, technology, behavior patterns
- shared values within the org: important to distinguish between values that are espoused by the org and those that are actually in operation
- basic beliefs and assumptions held by members of an org: deeply ingrained, hard to study
major models of org culture
- OReilley model: Org Culture Profile; cultures can be distinguished based on the predominant values that are reinforced within the org
7 values: innovation, stability, respect for others, outcome orientation, attention to detail, team orientation, aggressiveness - Denison model: culture can be described according to 4 general dimensions: adaptability, mission, involvement, consistency; orgs described along 2 dimensions: external vs internal; flexible vs stable
newer model, will likely be used in future research
functions of org culture
external adaptation: culture reflects behaviors and beliefs that have survived over time because they have helped a group of people adapt more successfully to their environment
internal integration: culture can be thought of as the glue that bonds the social structure of the larger org together
ASA framework fits here; those who don’t share org values either declined to join company or left
measuring org culture
self reports easy to administer, provide quantitative indices to describe culture
ethnographic methods: observe and record behaviors in org for extended period of time; slightly better than self reports, better capturing of culture
need informants, they should be long tenured
changing org culture
culture doesn’t develop randomly, it’s developed over time because it’s an adaptation to the environment
org culture change is difficult because by its nature culture is deeply ingrained
culture is rarely questioned or scrutinized, many people benefit from the culture remaining the way it is currently
nature of org change
organizations pass through distinct life stages
- birth/early growth: heavy influence from founders, top down development
- org midlife: time of growth/expansion; org subcultures developed that can threaten the overarching org culture if too strong
- org maturity: org faced with choice of renewal or stagnation; failing to change the culture = ultimate failure of org
impact of org culture
culture impacts org performance, recruitment and retention, and employee satisfaction/well being
- org culture does make a difference in bottom line org performance (revenues, stock price, net income)
adaptive cultures = better performance - individuals tend to be more attracted to orgs that have cultures that align with their own values
ASA; once people are in the org they will remain if compatible - mismatch between actual culture and what employees feel the culture is associated with lower job at, higher strain, stress, turnover intent
climate vs. culture
climate focuses on how the org functions (what it supports, rewards, expects), while culture addresses the assumptions and values attributed to why particular activities and behaviors are rewarded, supported, expected
types of cultures
task cultures: stress importance of structuring tasks, being clear about expectations, and achieving goals
relationship cultures: focus on developing people in order to build employee cohesion and collaboration
attraction and socialization
people are the most important part of an org; to remain successful, an org must focus its efforts on attracting and selecting employees appropriately. orgs should properly socialize new employees to help them adjust to the work environment; provide them information and allow them to ask questions and seek out information
organizational perspective of the recruitment process
aim of recruiting is to generate a large pool of highly qualified applicants so that the org stands the best chance of success
recruitment planning focuses on the number of employees needed, when they’ll be needed, and how the labor market will affect these things
it starts with identifying the org’s plan for where it’s going and how it’s going to get there, putting clear implications on staffing needs. an assessment of the supply of labor for various job categories also helps.
ASA framework
applicants are attracted to and stay in organizations with cultures that are compatible with their personalities. research has generally supported this theory; members of orgs, workgroups tend to be rather homogeneous in terms of personality. implies that orgs need to be aware of how they portray themselves in media and other recruitment sources
Kirkpatrick training evaluation model
Is very generalizable and follows a goal based approach.
Level 1: reaction: degree to which they find it favorable, engaging, and job relevant. Measured with attitude questionnaires that are distributed after the training occurs.
Level 2: learning: The degree to which participants acquire the intended knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence andcommitmentbased on their participation in the training. Usually done via testing or examination; pre testing and post testing must be combined in order to be valid.
Level 3: Behavior: The degree to which participants apply what they learned during training when they are back on the job; did performance improve? Can be formal or informal testing of the capabilities to perform the skills while on the job.
Level 4: Results: The degree to which targeted outcomes occur as a result of the training, and assess the cost vs. benefits of the program. Measures impact of training program via improved work quality, quality, morale, etc. harder to measure
literature on org justice
Meta analyses at the beginning of the 2000s were abundant and then interest in the topic subsided. The past decade has viewed justice through theoretical lens of social exchange theory, and reactions to justice is usually seen through affect. Social exchange quality (trust, org commitment, POS, LMX) and affect both serve as a mediator between justice and performance (task and contextual). Distributive justice was first construct of interest in the justice literature. More recent work focuses on procedural justice. The current conceptualization of justice adds a third factor, interactional justice. There was some debate over whether interactional is a third type on its own or if it is better conceptualized as a sub-type underneath procedural. Much disagreement before Colquitt 2001 meta over factor structure of justice, made worse by low quality and inconsistent measures of the dimensions. Colquitt 2001 suggests 4 types, with informational justice being the 4th dimension.
Org justice : how to foster
Distributive: outcomes should be consistent with the norms for allocation; equality
Procedural: fostered through voice during decision making; influence over outcomes; adherence to fair process criteria (consistency, lack of bias, accuracy, ethicality)
Interactional: decision makers treat people with respect and sensitivity and explain the rationale for decisions thoroughly
informational: share information that can be shared
Psychological safety: future research directions
- Investigate influence of culture on psych safety climate development, deployment and sustainment of PS
- Investigate potential negative effects of PS (too much of a good thing effect, TMGT). Teams high in PS are more likely to engage in unethical behavior.
- How does PS strength change across the different stages of team development
- Using more qualitative methods to get a deeper understanding of PS, such as qualitative interviews or observational techniques like looking at verbal and non-verbal communication cues. Face reading software could be used to determine the extent to which people feel comfortable
- Examining PS in more collective cultures
discuss psych safety
Especially important in work teams, critical to high performing work teams. Especially important in work environments where employee and customer safety are paramount; PS reduces employee errors and enhances safety, increases team and individual learning. Behaviors such as sharing of ideas, voicing concerns, seeking more feedback result from high levels of PS. Conceptually distinct but some overlap with trust; PS focuses on how group members perceive a group norm, trust = how one person views another. Important in the future as team work becomes more common and creativity and innovation become objective focus for orgs as work becomes more complex and specialized. Leadership behavior, such as support, integrity, and openness is also important to facilitating psych safety. Psych safety is both an antecedent and mediating mechanism to many outcomes. Individual’s perceived status within a team = more psych safety. Connection with training: high PS = better learning = better performance. PS also linked to overall org performance. Although its a multilevel construct, it’s most meaningful at the team level unless the org is small. In summary, most of the antecedents of PS are under the category of supportive environments, where PS is a mediator. different work groups within the same org can have different PS climates, which indicates that it’s a group level construct and that much of the variance is attributable to supervisors and managers
practical implications of psych safety research
Even when org culture is strong, PS can vary from department to department and from team to team. This is due to the differences in communication styles that send different messages about the consequences of taking interpersonal risks. Managers should be intentional in their communication to their teams and orgs should try to be consistent and congruent with this in order to foster it at org level. PS needs to be combined with other things in order to best enable learning and performance (strategy, vision, goals, supportive leadership etc)
CWBs
Broadly defined, little agreement exists on how such behaviors should be categorized and how they relate to each other. Recent metas indicate one higher order factor at general level with more specific facets under.
Models range from dichotomous to extremely fine grained. The most important distinction is the focal target of the behavior; whether its towards the org/individuals or the self
virtual teams
Are growing and expected to be even more common in future. Allow flexibility in staffing and cost savings from reduced travel, but lower levels of cohesion, work sat, trust, cooperation, and commitment to team goals. Also more difficult to lead than face to face teams, especially leader behaviors such as motivating and managing dynamics. To minimize these effects, we need to train leaders to invest more time and effort to learning how to use and apply media properly, but this is not always feasible. Additionally, supplementing hierarchical leadership with shared leadership (collaborative decision making & shared responsibility, mutual influence process) and structural supports (structure and organized task delegation, fair reward systems, communication that facilitates connectivity) in virtual teams helps.
leader development
is shaped by:
Experience matters but not just length of time, also breadth of experience
Skills matter, but different skills are important at different times in a leader’s career, it’s important to develop skills: creativity, intelligence, wisdom important as well as motivation to enhance these
Self development particularly work, career growth and mastery orientations dispositional characteristics that facilitate self development behaviors
interpersonal: LMX important
Authenticity: emotions and values facilitate its emergence and development
Processes: shape rate and pattern of leader development; emerge through mentoring, 360 feedback, training, action learning etc.
When evaluating LD interventions use indicators of development not performance since its contaminated. Also SNA could help determine whether has been a change in connectivity among leader and subordinates. Along with HLM to assess multilevel change over time and RODI
360 degree feedback
Should be for developmental purposes, for self awareness
When designing it, consider strategic and org factors that can help link it back to org performance improvement and goals, and embedded within HR. Also consider the org culture; not every culture is a good place for 360 feedback and it won’t be effective in a culture that doesn’t support it.
Leadership research trajectory including future directions
Trait theories dominated at beginning but results disappointing, Ohio State studies broke ground with consideration and initiating structure. These two dimensions took over as the dominant lens until TL came around. Consideration and initiating structure were robust but researchers questioned the generality of the validates and measures themselves. Although it was limited in terms of being empirically tested, some thought the relationships of the two to outcomes were curvilinear. Although OLS dimensions were an important basis for leadership research, they have often been criticized in terms of utility and validity. the four types of behaviors that have typically dominated leadership research are consideration (job sat) initiating structure (role conflict/ambiguity), contingent rewards (justice/motivation) and TL, each with different theoretical rationales (listed there). Virtual teams is a good future direction. In terms of theory we also need to integrate theory and make it more comprehensive given the lack of agreement in the current theories that often diverge from each other. There are all these separate theories that only explain it to a certain extent, although LMX and TL are promising, they’re still not the whole picture. We need to work towards getting on the same page and integrating these theories making them more applicable for practitioners. One specific thing we could explore is the various mediating mechanisms between leader behavior and follower performance, cause there are so many but we need to hone in more on which specific behaviors account for the most variance in follower performance in order to improve theory and practical recommendations for leaders to be effective.
Leader development research
Shorter lifespan than leadership research in general; focuses on developing the individual to exert leadership effectively, much research in the general field of leadership has focused on linking personality but this doesn’t make sense from a developmental standpoint since personality is inherently enduring across a lifespan, so it doesnt explain much in this context. From a behavioral standpoint, training has been a focus but this is short term not long term planning for development. Leadership development is multilevel and longitudinal and must be understood from a larger picture including intra and interpersonal processes.
fit literature
based in interactional psych. Started out as a broad concept and because of this many distinctions made between types of fit, but construct proliferation has become a topic of recent debate in terms of conceptualizations, measures (direct vs. indirect), and analytic approaches. Alternatively conceptualized as similarity, need-satisfaction, and demand-ability match. PG (person group) and PS (Person supervisor) fit given less attention overall. Large amount of heterogeneity in the fit literature, in conceptualizations and measurements as well as methodology. Complementary vs. supplementary fit. Fit research has started to include personality with realization that personality is important to work performance. there needs to be a focus on multidimensional conceptualizations of fit rather than all these individual ones scattered around everywhere, they need to be incorporated and expanded to explain more in outcomes
types of fit
PJ, PO, PG, and PS fit
PJ: Two conceptualizations: demands-abilities fit is the extent to which employee KSAs align with what job requires. Second is when values, needs, preferences are met by the job.
PO: individual-org similarity in terms of values is primary conceptualization
PG: person team, interpersonal compatibility between individuals and their work groups. Research indicates for PG fit differs measured at individual level vs aggregate level, mostly want to know about unit level outcomes so individual level preferable
PS: match between supervisor and employee, related to LMX
ASA model explains how high levels of fit are generated in orgs
Participative interventions
important for intervention success. A steering group of employee and manager representatives is established; activities of that group should be documented as well as how it was formed, and level of decision latitude. All employees must be involved in some way in order for participatory interventions to be effective. Decide when and how employees will be involved and at which phases of the intervention.
Phases of org interventions
Initiation: strategy developed and role of formal actors determined. Communication for the program is developed here.
Screening: forms basis for developing actual content of intervention program, serves as baseline measurement for evaluating outcomes through pre and post measurements. Document how this is done.
Action planning: develop the activities, action plans should be recorded. Include a description of the activities, their purpose and process (meetings) of action plan development. Develop and document plans for the activities and methods of evaluating the success. Use the four levels of intervention activities (targeting individual, group, leader, or org procedures/struture) to identify which mechanisms drive outcomes at each level.
Implementation: document implementation activities before, during or after the intervention to improve the understanding of outcomes. Compare the plans for intervention activities against documentation of the activities that were actually implemented. Document everything
Effect evaluation: assess the causal chain of effects to establish whether observed changes are due to intervention or to something else (changes in working procedures from the intervention leads to changes in working conditions, which leads to changes in health, well being performance etc.). different effects are seen after different amounts of time and thus at different time points. Monitor changes in attitudes, mental models, values, knowledge, resources, working conditions, etc.
framework evaluating interventions
the nielson framework ensures external validity and maintains internal validity by proposing which elements should be examined when trying to determine the conditions under which an intervention may be successful, and how we can determine whether changes in outcomes can be ascribed to the intervention. within the Nielsen framework, there are four overarching categories that are crucial to evaluation over the phases of an intervention: org actors & their mental models, intervention context (both discrete and omnibus), intervention design, intervention process. The impact of interventions should involve multilevel evaluation: changes in attitudes, values and knowledge. Changes in individual resources. Changes in working conditions, changes in well being, changes in org procedures, changes in productivity and quality. Orgs should be perceived as a continuous process, thus interventions should be adapted to contextual conditions of the org. Evaluation should occur at every stage of the intervention process. Mental models of intervention phases and its process should be examined to rule out alternative explanations in case the intervention fails. Contextual factors can serve as mediator or moderator on link between intervention and its outcomes and may help rule out alternative explanations for intervention outcomes.
consequences that have arisen or may arise as a result of technology in the workplace
- addiction to smartphones/computers, distracting from work
- more work life balance issues since work is attached to cell phone now
- may feel autonomy is threatened, be demotivated
- need for retraining; IT, specialized tech skills, empathy, creative/innovative jobs
what role will IO psychologists play in this new age of automation of jobs and technology?
- HR programs that are developed to retrain employees
- evaluating attitudes towards technology integration and acceptance
- basic change principles
describe SDT
SDT is a theory of motivation that concern’s people’s growth tendencies and psychological needs. Focuses on motivation behind choices people make. Addresses 3 universal psychological needs of humans: competence, autonomy, and psych relatedness. When these needs are met, people will grow optimally. Social environment needs to nurture these needs in order for people to reach their full potential. Includes intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation. humans seek out optimal stimulation and challenging activities and find these activities intrinsically motivating because they have a basic need for competence
discuss goal setting theory
A theory of motivation; goal setting is linked to task performance. Specific and challenging goals with feedback = better performance. Goals provide direction for people, what needs to be done, how much effort to put in. Difficult goals good but need to be attainable. Basically SMART goals. The outcomes of GST are self efficiency, goal commitment,
limitations = sometimes personal goals in conflict with org or supervisor goals, which is bad for performance. Need to find balance between difficult goals and too difficult goals; employee needs to possess skill and competency to reach a goal. limited evidence to link goal setting to job sat.
brief history of teams research; primary themes in teams research
Defining teams
Developing taxonomies
Input process outcome model (McGrath 1964)
IPO model originally did not include time, suggested linear functioning; embedded into larger contexts and addition of temporal components, new constructs;
IMO to include mediators and multi level nature of teams (Ilgen 2005); time becomes primary focal point
themes in research
Conflict, diversity, movement from linear to non linear, mental models, multilevel nature of teams, composition models, task complexity,
