Organisational behaviour Flashcards
Organisation
a social arrangement for achieving controlled performance to achieve collective goals
Organisational behaviour
the study of behaviour in organisational settings the interface between human behaviour and the organisation
Individual characteristics e.gs
personality, values
individual processes e.g
learning, perception, motivation
Interpersonal processes e.g.s
trust, justice, power/politics
Theory for explaining behaviour with reference
Behaviour is a function of the person and the environment (Lewin,1931)
Intelligence theory with reference
General intelligence (g) (Spearman,1904)
People tend to get similar scores on each area of intelligence i.e. each area of intelligence is highly correlated
Idea of underlying ‘g’ has empirical support
Job complexity increases the positive relationship between GMA and job performance
GMA and job performance
w ref
Meta-analytic support (Hunter and Hunter,1984)
Person with high GMA learns more and quicker
GMA is often used in selection processes
Critical evaluation of ‘g’
Link between intelligence and success is robust
Specific cognitive abilities predict job performance better when they match the demands of the role
The test results in a ‘maximum performance paradigm’ i.e. the best you can perform in a test might not reflect everyday performance
Potential bias against minority HOWEVER, intelligence tests predict job performance across ethnic groups, use of culture free tests and other factors predict differences e.g. marital status
Alternative theories to intelligence only affecting job performance
Emotional intelligence as ability (Mayer et al., 2000)
Extends traditional models of intelligence and addresses individuals’ ability to
perceive, process and manage emotions and emotional information
effectively
Performance-based measure (MEIS)
Critical evaluation of E.I
Important for jobs with emotional demands
More difficult to measure (compared to GMA):
* Measurement issues for ability EI, e.g. scoring
* Potential for faking/impression management in
EI self-reports → Problematic for selection!
* Some evidence of EI predicting job performance
Personality w reference
Characteristics of the person that account for
consistent patterns of experience and action
(Pervinet al, 2004)
Trait theories w reference
The big 5 (Costa & McCrae, 1987)
Openness to Experience: like working with ideas and possibilities, ready to re-examine attitudes and values
Conscientiousness: organised , thorough and a desire to do things well
Extraversion: quantity and intensity of energy directed
outwards into the social world, outgoing, assertive
Agreeableness: being helpful to others, mindful of others’ feelings, preferring cooperation to competition, kind, sympathetic
Neuroticism: prone to worry and self-doubt, highly affected by their emotions in stressful situations
way to remember big 5 model
O
C
E
A
N
Critical evaluation of personality tests
consistency
Strength of relationship between a predictor and criterion
Big 5 predicting performance
w ref
Metanalytic evidence (Wilmot and Ones,2021)
Openness- positive impact on training performance
Conscientious- across a range of jobs
Extraversion- positive relationship in some jobs i.e. sales
Agreeableness- positively related to teamwork
Neuroticism (low)- army/ law enforcemnt
Importance of motivation (reference)
Given your ability to perform and an environment which allows you to perform motivation determines whether you will do it (Muchinsky,2006)
What motivates you (ref)
Intrinsic doing an activity for it’s inherent satisfaction
Extrinsic when an activity is done to attain a separable outcome
(Ryan & Deci,2000)
Needs theories for motivation w ref
Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs (Maslow,1943)
Self actualisation
Esteem
Social
Safety
Physiological
Critical evaluation of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
Very little empirical evidence
can people move down hierarchy
unclear how one need activates another
Process theories of motivation
Goal-setting theory (Locke & Latham,1990)
Goals provide direction, release energy and enhance persistency
critical evaluation of goal setting theory
Strong empirical support
But
Goals may conflict i.e. quantity or quality
Task performance only
Example of Goal setting theory
Lboro performance development review
Influences on attitude formation at work
Personality
Values (extrinsic/intrinsic)
Social influence
Work situation
Job design (ref)
the process of assigning tasks to a job including the interdependency of those tasks with other jobs (Bratton,2010)
Scientific management
w reference
(Taylor,1910)
Systematic approach of determining the best way to do a job through standardization
Critical evaluation of Taylorism
low job satisfaction lead to poor mental health/turnover and absenteeism
Job characteristics model
(Hackman & Oldham,1980)
Job Characteristics Psychological states
Skill variety
Task identity meaningfulness at
work
Task significance
Autonomy Experience and
responsibility
Feedback Knowledge of results at
work
Skill variety
Degree to which the work involves different activities
Task identity
The degree to which the job requires completion of a identifiable piece of work
Task significance
Degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other people
Autonomy
Freedom for people to take and implement decisions i.e. scheduling of work, use of tools and procedures to carry it out and independent decision making.
Feedback
The extent to which the job itself provides info on how well one is performing.
Critical evaluation of the job characteristics model
Lack of social context
Theory of purposeful work behaviour (ref)
(Barrick et al.,2013)
Individual differences in motivational strivings are linked to peoples preferences for goals and job characteristics
Attitudes
a predisposition to feel think and act towards some object person or event in a favourable way
Measuring attitudes
- Almost always self-report
- Likert scale- from agreement to disagreement
- Range of items
- Potential problem socially desirable responding
Components of job satisfaction
- Pay/ benefits
- Co-worker supervision
- The work itself
Possible reasons for the relationship between job satisfaction
Job satisfaction causes job performance i.e. people tend to work harder when happy
Job performance causes job satisfaction
JS and JP are correlated due to another variable i.e. personality unconsciousness big 5 influence both
Factors influencing job satisfaction
Procedural/distributive justice
personality differences
Job characteristics
Leadership behaviour
Big 5 correlation with job satisfaction w ref
-.29 for Neuroticism, .25 for Extraversion, . and .26 for Conscientiousness.
Why do those with high neuroticism have lower job satisfaction w ref
(Emmons et al1985)
in part, because they select
themselves into situations that foster negative affect
Most important predictor for job satisfaction+ what it is w ref
(McFarlin & Sweeney, 1992,)
Distributive justice fairness of allocation of rewards
Satisfying work theory w ref
(Hackman & Oldham, 1976)
Task identity
Skill variety
task significance
Feedback
Autonomy
3 Forms of commitment w ref
(Allen & Meyer, 1990)
Affective-emotional attachment
Continuance- cost and risk of leaving
Normative- moral dimension (loyalty)
Organisational Commitment w ref
(Mowday et al., 1979)
The relative strength of an employee’s identification with and involvement in an organisation
Empirical findings of organisational commitment
High affective OC linked to high performance
High continuance OC sometimes linked to poor performance
Job Satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job performance
Meta-analytic evidence:
JP (Judge et al., 2001)
Critical evaluation of the Job attitude – Work behaviours relationship
Moderate (to strong) relations
Social pressure not to reveal attitudes
Lack of opportunity and/ ability
Theory of planned behaviour w ref
(Ajzen & Madden, 1986)
Attitude
Subjective norm
perceived behaviour control i.e. having to be home at a certain time
Leads to intention which can lead to behaviour
(PBC can lead to behaviour directly)
Example of attempts to alter behaviour
NHS ads for COVID aimed at changing social norm about covid
Behaviour modification theory w ref
Operant conditioning (Skinner,1938)
Learned and reinforced response
Positive adds something
Negative takes something away
Reinforcement increases behaviour while punishment decreases it
Business use of operant and conditioning w ref
to improve productivity absenteeism reduce theft etc (Martin& Pear,2019)
Financial rewards
private desk
Recognition
Organisation behaviour modification w ref
(Luthans & Kreitner,1985)
5 stages
Identify critical behaviours i.e. unsafe
Measure them
Analyse behaviour
Develop intervention strategy
Evaluate intervention strategy
Evaluation of behaviour modification theory w ref
May lead to a decrease in other behaviours that you want
as workers concentrate their efforts on behaviours that get
rewarded
Expensive
undermines intrinsic motivation
(Shaw & Gupta,2015)
Social learning theory w ref and experiment
(Bandura, 1971)
People are not passive objects observational learning and self efficacy both important for learning
Bobo doll experiment adult attacks doll child copies
Self-efficacy
belief in own ability to
master certain tasks and
reach specific goals –
central for personal agency
Processes in observational learning w ref
(Bandura, 1971)
Attention- observing models behaviour
Retention- memorising behaviour
Production- rehearsing behaviour
Motivation- reinforcement of behaviour
Self-efficacy is influenced by:
Self-assessment of past performance
* Verbal persuasion from other people
* Observational learning
What does self-efficacy influence
Goals and activities a person chooses to engage
* How hard and long a person strives to achieve a goal
* Appraisal & emotions of person during tasks, (challenge vs
hindrance; hope vs. anxiety)
Manager’s role in employee learning
Develop employee’s self-efficacy
Provide models/examples of desired behaviour
Allow opportunity for people to reflect
Appreciate individual differences
Evaluation of Bandura’s work
Strong empirical support for importance of self-efficacy
Bandura’s many concepts have not been brought
together as one coherent theory
* Can be difficult to measure learning - not all social
learning can be easily observed
Theory of planned behaviour
(Ajzen & Madden, 1986)
Attitude
Subjective norm
Perceived behavioural control(belief of a persona that they can perform required behaviour)
All lead to intention which leads to behaviour
PBC can lead to behaviour directly
Evaluation of T Planned Behaviour w ref
(Conner & Armitage, 2001)
Meta-analytic results found
a) Intentions predict behaviour to a moderate degree
b) TBP variables predict intentions moderately well
Assumes humans are rational
Subjective norm weak predictor
Process of perception w ref
Buchanan et al. (2017)
Bottom up:
brings the sensory input from the environment to the brain for interpretation
Top down: brain
uses knowledge, beliefs and expectations to help us interpret the sensory
information
Process of perception - application
Successful interpersonal relationships depend on some overlap between our perceptual world
Process of perception – critical
evaluation w ref
Dynamic interplay between bottom-up and top-down processes(Shelton et al, 2017)
Fundamental Attribution Error
We are too inclined to see the person as the cause of their own behaviour. We neglect the influence of other persons involved (observers) and the general situation – especially when bad things happen
Actor observer effect
Attributing other people’s behaviour to their character and one’s own behaviour to the situation
Application of attribution theory w ref
Performance appraisal
Discrimination
Leadership attributions account for significant proportions of the variance in leadership behaviors (Martinko et al., 2007)
Attribution theory w ref
Heider (1957) – people make causal attributions about events that happen around them –
These can be:
Personal- how skilled someone is
Situational- how difficult the task is
Attribution theory critical evaluation
Attributional dimensions: Controllability: smallest amount of research attention
High predictive power, e.g.:
▪ attributions account for significant proportions of the variance in
leadership behaviors (Martinko et al., 2007)
Halo effect
perception of a
person on one quality influences
positively the perception of them
on another quality
Horns effect
general
judgements about a person are
made from the perception of a
negative characteristic
Stereotyping w ref
simplifying the process of perception, making judgements of other people instead of dealing with a range of complex stimuli
(Mullins, 2016)
Stereotype e.g w ref
Happy people viewed as more competent
(Todorov et al,2005)
Perceptual Defence
The tendency to screen
out information that
we find perceptually
threatening or difficult
to process. i.e smoking
Projection
attribution of your own
thoughts, feelings, values,
attitudes on to others.
Unconscious bias
Is about unconscious social preferences and is closely
related to all other perceptual errors
Group w ref
Schein’s (1980)
A group is a number of people who
interact with each other;
are psychologically aware of each other;
perceive themselves to be a group.
Team w ref
Brill’s (1976)
A team is a group of people, each of whom possesses particular expertise; each of whom is responsible for making individual decisions; who together hold a common purpose
Stages of team development w ref
(Tuckman 1965)
Stage 1: Forming- individualistic comms from leader to members
Stage 2: Storming- comms often aggressive, stress over roles dissipating energy
Stage 3: Norming- Informal experts emerge Communication to each other as well as to leader
Stage 4: Performing- Team is pro-active Team share leadership
Critical evaluation of Tuckman’s Stages of Team Development Theory
REF
Lack of quantitative research / The model was based on a literature review and observation of a limited number of small group settings
Recent theories recognize the complexity of group dynamics in today’s world and are not easily represented in a simple model (Humphrey et al,2014)
team role def w ref
A tendency to behave, contribute and interrelate with others in a particular way.“ (Belbin, 1981)
Shaper contribution and weaknesses
Action oriented role. thrives on pressure. The drive and courage to overcome obstacles. Prone to provocation
coordinator contribution and weaknesses
People oriented
Mature, confident, a good chairman(delegates well).
Can often be seen as manipulative
Plant contribution and weaknesses
Cerebal oriented
imaginative, unorthodox. Solves
difficult problems.
Too pre-occupied to communicate effectively.
Application of Belbin’s theory
Only as a tool for awareness of own strengths and abilities understanding own role within a team helps to deal better with the demands of the team environment
Team Problems – Belbin Solutions
Conflict- team worker
Underachievement- Shaper
Mistakes prone- Monitor evaluator
-
According to Belbin, each member performs two roles:
A functional role (professional knowledge)
A team role (pattern of team interaction)
Critical evaluation of Belbin’s team roles
Reductionist – we are more than team roles
The interaction between situation and team task requirements needs to be better understood: Which roles required for which task in which situation?
Pros of Decision Making in Teams
More information from different sources
Mutually acceptable solution
Cons of Decision Making in Teams W REF
Pressures to conform experiment (Asch, 1951)
Lines of responsibility can become unclear
Groupthink Definition w ref
is the psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses dissent and appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups.” (Janis, 1982)
Suggestions for Minimising Groupthink
REFERENCE
Impartial leader
Critical evaluators
Devil’s advocate
(Janis,1972)
Definition of group polarisation w ref
Groups tend to make more extreme decisions than we might expect, given the initial preferences of group members (Bettenhausen, 1991)
Why does group polarisation occur?
social comparison (we like to present ourselves in a socially desirable way)
persuasive argumentation (information consistent with the views held by the majority will dominate the group discussion)
“Clearer lens” vs “Narrower scope” perspective personality theory w ref
“Narrower scope” perspective: Expressions of personality differ across contexts
(work & private life) but are consistent within
a context
“Clearer lens” perspective: acquaintance-rated conscientiousness better predictor of job
performance and CWB than self–ratings
(Connelly & Hülsheger 2012)
Primary Mental Abilities (PMAs) w ref
Thurstone’s (1938)
Intelligence – a set of PMAs all rather independent of
one another
Produces intelligence profiles rather than a single IQ
score
