Semester 1 Flashcards
Organizational Behavior Definition
- A social arrangement for achieving controlled performance in pursuit of collective goals
- The systematic study of the behavior of individuals and groups in organisational settings
Research Methods
- Correlational research - relationship between 2 variables (e.g verbal ability & performance)
- Longitudinal studies - repeated observations of variables over time
- Experimental studies - manipulates one variable (independent) and measures the effects on dependent variables whilst holding all other variables constant
Describe the Cycle of Theory & Research
- Theory - an explanation of how and why variables are related to each other.
- Involves empirical data collection and analysis
- Test outcomes influence views & revised theories
- Cycle - Theory>Hypothesis>Research>Correlational research OR Experimental research>Outcome»Theory
Theory for explaining behaviour
- Kurt Lewin’s famous formula of 1931
- B = f(P,E)
- Behavior is a function of the person and environment
- Lewin claims that the best way to understand behavior is to use the Cycle of Theory.
The definition of Spearman’s ‘g’
(general mental ability)
- Influential definition - “a very good general mental capability that involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience”
The idea behind Spearman’s ‘g’
(general mental ability)
- Idea - The ‘g’ factor underlies all specific cognitive abilities such as verbal, numerical, spatial abilities and problem solving
- Measured via any test batteries of specific cognitive abilities
Explanation of One General Intelligence & Measures of Intelligence
- One GMA factor can explain the correlations among different specific cognitive abilities
- The first statistical test of human intelligence by Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon was early 20th century (Contemporary intelligence tests)
- Modern intelligence tests are of this type. A combination of verbal comprehension, word fluency, numeric and spatial intelligence. (standardized conditions)
The idea of Spearman’s ‘g’ and how it links to job performance
- Test of Spearman’s ‘g’ idea using factor analysis:
- Empirical result: extraction of one strong overall factor underlying specific aspects (idea of G as one underlying factor has empirical support)
- Meta-analytic support: strong correlation between GMA & job performance
- GMA also predicts training success/income
- Job complexity strengthens positive GMA performance relation
- Person with high GMA learns more job knowledge and faster
Thurstone’s Primary Mental Abilities (1938)
- Intelligence - a set of PMA’s all rather independent of one another
- PMAs - verbal comprehension, word fluency,numerical ability, spatial visualization, reasoning, perceptual speed, associative memory
-Produces intelligence profiles as opposed to a single IQ score
- Used in clinical & organisational assessment (Weschler’s intelligence scale)
- PMA structure is compatible with hierarchical GMA structure
- However, this can be resource intensive
Critical evaluation of Spearman’s ‘g’ and Thurstone’s PMA
- Link between intelligence and success is robust
- Specific cognitive abilities predict performance better when matched to job demands
- Tests a ‘maximum performance paradigm’ (the best you do under test conditions, not everyday life) so motivation is important
- GMA & specific abilities predict task performance (but do they predict other outcomes such as helping & extra role behaviors?)
- Potential bias against certain ethnic groups
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences
- Idea: All intelligences are completely independent
1. Linguistic
2. Spatial
3. Logical-mathematical
4. Musical
5. Bodily-kinaethetic
6. Interpersonal
7. Intrapersonal
Critical Evaluation of Multiple Intelligences
- No measure was developed by Gardner
- No systematic research to test his theory
- Incompatible with well established concept of ‘g’
- Empirically, several intelligences have high inter correlations and thus are not independent
- key cognitive abilities not covered by the theory
- Textbooks often present MI as biased
- Best to conceptualize MI as talent, skills or competence
Emotional Intelligence Definitions
- “the ability to monitor one’s own and other people’s emotions, to discriminate between different emotions and label them appropriately, and use emotional information to guide thinking and behavior.” (Colman, 2006)
- As ability - “the ability to carry out reasoning about emotions and the ability to use emotions and emotional knowledge to enhance thought.”
Emotional Intelligence (Mayer et al., 2000; 2008)
- Extends traditional intelligence models and addresses individuals’ ability to perceive, process and manage emotions and emotional information effectively.
- Measure - Multifactor Emotional Intelligence Scale (MEIS) which is a performance based measure.
- Assessing emotions scale - assesses how effectively respondents identify, understand, regulate and harness emotions in themselves and others.
Critical Evaluation of Emotional Intelligence
- Important for jobs with emotional demands
- Measurement issues for ability EI (scoring)
- Faking measurements in self-reported EI can be problematic for selection
- There is some evidence of EI predicting job performance
- EI concepts are too broad and lack coherent definition (Golemans)
- Limited data across jobs to compare. emotional task analysis
Personality definitions
- “Characteristics of the person that account for
consistent patterns of experience and action”
(Pervin, Cervone, & John, 2004) - “a relatively stable and consistent set of
traits that interact with environmental factors
to produce emotional, cognitive and
behavioural responses” (Hughes & Batey, 2017)
Sources of personality differences
- Genetic inheritance
2.Family experience
3.Culture - Life experience
Definition of a Trait
” a dimension upon which people differ psychologically. Traits are stable over time.”
(Arnold et al. 2010 p715)
Definition of Factor Analysis > personality factors
“Factor analysis is a statistical technique used to identify key factors that underlie relationships between variables.”
seeks to discover if the observed variables (e.g., ratings on
trait adjectives or personality items) can be explained in terms of a smaller number of variables called factors (e.g., personality factors).
Trait Theories: The Big 5
(Costa &McCrae, 1992)
OCEAN
- Openness to experience - like working with ideas and possibilities, ready to re-examine attitudes and values.
- Conscientiousness - highly organised and thorough in one’s approach to tasks, a desire to do 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 over competition, kind, sympathetic
- Neuroticism - prone to worry and self-doubt, highly affected by their emotions in stressful situations
The Big 5 Personality Dimensions
- On a continuous scale shown by normal distribution of each trait
- 5 factors are relatively independent of each other
- Widely accepted for many years
- Hierarchical, global & facet levels
- Be aware that there are sub facet levels too.
Psychometric Criteria: Critical Evaluation of tests
- Reliability: consistent accurate measurement; few measurement errors.
- Criterion-related validity: the strength of relationship between a predictor (e.g., personality/intelligence test, interview) and the criterion (e.g. effective work behaviours)
- Content validity: covers representative behaviours/indicators of a construct
→ expert judgement needed - Construct validity: Does an instrument measure what it intends to measure. Expected relations to (theoretically) similar constructs/measures.
→ correlations & factor analyses (CFA, EFA)
Define Criterion-related validity
the strength of relationship between a predictor (e.g., personality/intelligence test, interview) and the criterion (e.g. effective work behaviours)
Define Content validity
Covers representative behaviours/indicators of a construct
→ expert judgement needed
Define Construct validity
Does an instrument measure what it intends to measure. Expected relations to (theoretically) similar constructs/measures.
→ correlations & factor analyses (CFA, EFA)
Big 5: Predicting Performance
(Meta-analytic Evidence)
- Openness - positively predicts training performance; professional occupations
- Conscientiousness - positively predicts job performance across a range of jobs
- Extraversion - positive relation in some jobs (i.e social jobs, such as sales/management)
- Agreeableness - positively related to teamwork (healthcare)
- Emotional Stability (low neuroticism) - positively associated with job performance (military, law enforcement)
- Relations differ across major occupational groups
Type vs Trait Theories
- Trait - people differ in amounts on a single continuem
- Type - distinct, discreet, discontinuous categories of personality
- Empirical data pattern is needed for personality ‘type’ theories
- Bimodal distribution supports ‘type’ ideas
Definition of Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
Jung’s Theory
- 8 different patterns for how we carry out mental activities
- Developed from Jung 4 dichotomies (16 personality types)
extraversion vs introversion
sensing vs intuition
thinking vs feeling
judging vs perceiving
Critical Evaluation of Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
- Construct Validity - 16 types don’t replicate well
- Reliability - people would be reclassified if they took the test 5 weeks from now
- Incomplete - Doesn’t address emotional stability
- Use is problematic for recruitment/selection
- It is popular in the UK and claimed to be useful for team development
- They do NOT receive empirical support.
Personality and Faking
- Prevalent in high stakes situations
- Increases scores in conscientiousness and emotional stability
- Extreme fakers impact criterion-related validity
- Faking has negative impacts on some honest candidates as they may be screened out in the early stages
Definition of a Group (Schein 1980)
A group is a number of people who interact with each other, are psychologically aware of each other and perceive themselves to be a group
Definition of a Team (Brill 1976)
A team is a group of people who hold a common purpose, who communicate, collaborate and consolidate knowledge from which future decisions are influenced
Stages of Team Development (Tuckman 1965, Tuckman and Jensen 1977)
Creating Stages:
1. Orientation (Why am I here?) <forming>
2. Trust Building (Who are you?) <forming>
3. Goal/role Clarification (What are we doing?) <storming>
4. Commitment (How?) <norming>
Sustaining Stages:
5. Implementation (Who does what, where, when?) <norming>
6. High performance (How?) <performing>
7. Renewal (Why continue?) <performing></performing></performing></norming></norming></storming></forming></forming>
Common Characteristics of Stage 1: Forming
- Individualistic
- People withhold full participation
- Trust: wait and see
- Management gives no real authority to act
- Mission is understood, but does not motivate
- Communication from leader to members, rather than members to members, little listening
Common Characteristics of Stage 2: Storming
- Honeymoon is over, energy dissipating
- Stress over roles, over uneven contribution
- Trust: working out who to trust
- Purpose: slowly becoming clear
- Communication: often aggressive
- Team processes start to be worked on
Common Characteristics of Stage 3: Norming
- Informal experts emerge; team over-rely on them
- Swear allegiance to team/team pride; rivalry with other teams
- Reluctant to challenge others
- Trust: developing, but not tested
- Clear focus on performance and goals
- Communication to each other as well as to leader
- Team processes well underway
Common Characteristics of Stage 4: Performing
- Team is pro-active; sets most of its own priorities
- Team seek wider business info & involvement
- Strong culture of “high accountability”
- Team share leadership: all involved
- Team prioritise what is good for the business as a whole
- Trust high: climate of support and challenge
- Team manages its performance as a team
Application of Theory for Stages of Team Development (Tuckman 1965, Tuckman & Jensen 1965)
- Promote effectiveness of work groups
- Starting point for team development practitioners
- Understanding team processes across different organisations
_ OTHER EXAMPLES NEEDED
Critical evaluation of Tuckman’s Stages of Team Development Theory
- Limitations of model: no representative sample of settings where small group development processes are likely to occur.
- 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
Definition of a Team Role (Belbin, 1981)
A tendency to behave, contribute and interrelate with others in a particular way.
What are the 3 action-orientated team roles?
- Shaper
- Implementer
- Completer/Finisher
Describe the action-orientated team role: Shaper
Contributions:
Challenging, dynamic, thrives on pressure. The drive and courage to overcome obstacles.
Allowable Weaknesses:
Prone to provocation. Offends people’s feelings.
Describe the action-orientated team role: Implementer
Contributions:
Disciplined, reliable, conservative and efficient. Turns ideas into practical actions.
Allowable Weaknesses:
Somewhat inflexible. Slow to respond to new possibilities.
Describe the action-orientated team role: Completer/Finisher
Contributions:
Painstaking, conscientious, anxious. Searches out errors and omissions. Delivers on time.
Allowable Weaknesses:
Inclined to worry unduly. Reluctant to delegate.
What are the 3 people-orientated team roles?
- Coordinator
- Team worker
- Resource Investigator
Describe the people-orientated team role: Coordinator
Contributions:
Mature, confident, a good chairman. Clarifies goals, promotes decision-making, delegates well.
Allowable Weaknesses:
Can often be seen as manipulative. Off loads personal work.