Theories to Know Flashcards
Festinger (1954)
Social Comparison Theory
We have a drive to evaluate our opinions & abilities & When objective/non-social means are unavailable, we compare
Depending on where you are in the group structure, pressures to conform may vary in strength
As ability becomes more important, it becomes more salient & more competitive…
Once two parties have been rendered incomparable on ability, communication/competition will cease
When opinions diverge, you try to influence them
Diversity: minority groups have stronger pressures to conform
Kelley & Michela (1980); Martinko (2013)
Attribution Theory - people’s beliefs about the causes of significant outcomes (ie., successes & failures) affect their expectations for success, their emotions, and their behaviors
Can we attribute behavior to INTERNAL or EXTERNAL causes?
Is this an oddity for Jim (Distinctiveness) or is Jim chronically late (i.e., Consistency), is he the only one late on the team? (consensus)
Fundamental Attribution Error: we tend to underestimate power of situation
Self-serving bias, which is the tendency to make internal attributions for success and external attributions for failure.
Biases appear prevalent across cultures and increase with age
Detert & Edmondson (2011)
Implicit Voice Theories
Past approaches:
- psych safety as mediator between IV and Voice Behavior (e.g., supportive leadership & voice)
- personality, leader behavior, & org context as antecedents
- qualitative review of reluctance to speak up
conflating silence & voice leaves gaps - they try to fill by explaining implicit reasons why people don’t voice
-4 studies, empirical & qualitative
Constructs:
- presumed target (e.g., may be offended)
- need for solid data (e.g., don’t speak up unless you can answer every question, back up your idea)
- don’t bypass your boss
- don’t embarrass your boss
- negative consequences to career for voicing (e.g., may be rated lower for pointing out issues)
Ajzen (1991)
Extension of Theory of Reasoned Action (behavioral intentions are the most proximal predictors of behavior)
Added perceived behavioral control to include self-efficacy beliefs
Key Constructs:
attitude toward the act (i.e., beliefs, emotions, etc.), subjective norms (what would Susie do?), behavioral intent, & target behavior
attitude & norms—>intent—>behavior
Folkman & Lazarus (1966)
Coping & Emotion
Similar to COR theory, stress is viewed as a process, there is a feedback loop from coping back to emotion.
Process:
event–>Appraisal (primary & secondary)–>Coping (avoidant vs. vigilant; changing meaning (i.e., distancing; detaching); problem-focused (i.e., cognitively problem solving (i.e., stand your ground or using influence tactics to change someones’ mind or plotting ways to address the problem)
Coping as a mediator between appraisal and emotion.
Planful problem-solving and positive reappraisal appear to be the most “healthy” strategies…anticipatory coping can direct the emotional response/appraisal
Hobfoll & Shirom (2001); Hobfoll (1989)
Resources: material (i.e., food, shelter); emotional (social support); internal (i.e., self-esteem) are positively related to health and well-being
Stress is likely to occur whenever
(1) resources are threatened;
(2) resources are lost;
(3) the anticipated return for resources invested is not received
Resources can spiral (e.g., having resources puts you in a position to gain more resources in the future; not having resources makes you vulnerable to further resource loss)
Resources can act as buffers against stressful situations
Social support is an external source whereby individuals can accumulate resources above and beyond those within themselves–even provides positive effects above and beyond socioeconomic status.
Ryan & Deci (2001)
Self-Determination Theory - Theory of Human Motivation, Main Contribution: sources of motivation are not solely external
3 basic needs: autonomy (feeling volitional), competence (mastering your environment; taking on challenges), and relatedness (meaningful social connections; feeling cared about)
Universal need for growth, we have intrinsic motivation but we also internalize external stimuli & turn it into internal motivation (e.g., identification)
Identification represents the fully internalized external regulation…people will voluntarily act in accordance with the values/needs of that which they identify
Stimuli (e.g., job characteristics) that support these needs should promote autonomous motivation, well-being, etc.
Tangible rewards can both diminish interest & enjoyment in a task & promote intrinsic motivation through feedback
Individual differences/orientations also effect motivation (e.g., autonomous orientation, core self-evaluations)
Tie-ins: Hackman & Oldham (1980) job characteristics models; leadership (i.e., transformational behaviors that support psych needs); COR theory (psych. needs/internal resources (i.e., self-esteem) external resources (i.e., social support/relatedness)
Latham & Budworth (2007)
Work Motivation in the 20th Century
History:
Behaviorism (behavior is reactive, not cognitive or intentional)
Scientific Management (mans primary incentive is money), Two-factor theory & Maslow’s need hierarchy
Cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957)
Theory X & Y (self-regulation/self-motivation)
Equity Theory (Adams, 1965) people judge outputs relative to inputs
Expectancy Theory (what will the outcome bring me?)
Self-Efficacy (Bandura)
Goal Setting Theory (Locke & Latham)
-specific high goals>abstract/no goal
-higher goal = higher performance
-incentives affect perf through estab. specific high goals
Social Cognitive Theory (behavior determined by and affects consequences)
HIgh Performance Cycle (Specific goals + Self-Efficacy)
Locke & Latham (2013)
Most influential theory in management, strong empirical support
Central theory of motivation
-no “do your best”, set specific high goals & give feedback
Mediators (attention, effort, persistence, knowledge attainment)
Moderators (commitment, confidence, feedback, task complexity, org support, knowledge/abilities)
Sources of goals:
-self, assigned, participative (don’t work better than assigned)
Goals–>satisfaction
Theory applied to group level successfully
Proximal vs. Distal (proximate need feedback)
Learning goals lead to more persistence
Latest: subconscious goals (e.g., subtly priming call center employees with a photo of someone winning a race)
Salancik & Pfeffer (1978)
Social Information Processing
Counteracted the job characteristics research and argued that job attributes were socially constructed through collective perception and agreement.
Thus, others in your work environment influence what you focus on, how you assess your work, and the attitudes you develop.
Main DVs - job characteristics, job attitudes, satisfaction
People also rationalize past choices, because they will have to explain them, and subsequently become more committed.
Long history of social science research (Festinger, group-think, in-group/out-group) suggesting that there is a drive towards consistence in beliefs and dissidents and dissonant thoughts are edged out over time to reinforce the socially constructed/agreed upon “facts” about people and situations
Large empirical support; led to lots of leadership research –managers can and should influence the way employees view the job and organization
Hackman & Oldham (1976;1980)
Job Characteristics/Job Design
-skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback
Central argument: Employee effectiveness can be enhanced by designing jobs with certain characteristics and matching the qualities to the job.
- Experienced meaningfulness. The degree to which the jobholder experiences the work as inherently meaningful, as something that “counts” in his or her own system of values.
- Experienced responsibility. The degree to which the jobholder feels personally accountable and responsible for the results of the work he or she does.
- Knowledge of results. The degree to which the jobholder has confident knowledge about how well he or she is performing at work.
Schneider (1987); De Cooman (2013)
ASA model - The PEOPLE make the place
Individuals are attracted to, selected by, and retained in orgs where members are similar.
People affect structure, processes, and technology (similar to structuration theory/sociomateriality? Barley, 1988; Orlikowski & Scott (2008)
Orgs are unit of analysis (why are firms different?)
Homogeneity hypotheses (attracting leads to fit (homogeneous group) (similar to institutional isomorphism?)
Goals, processes, structures of org are determined by founders and early colleagues (hasn’t been totally seen in strategy research)
Chatman (1989)
P-O Fit - congruence between the norms and values of organizations and the values of persons
Prior research has incorrectly conceptualized or measured person factors (i.e., growth need strength varies between people) and/or situation factors (i.e. ignored that task characteristics can change)
Fundamental and enduring aspect of people and orgs are their values (Katz & Kahn, 1978)…and they vary in intensity
Change in individuals’ values or org values can occur…PO Fit is positively related to OCB
PO-fit mediates between socialization and norm/value convergence
Katz & Kahn (1966); Fellows & Kahn (2013)
Role Theory
Main idea: Behavior is governed by perceptions of a role, a socially constructed position, or category (i.e., “spouse” or “manger”.
Individuals may leave orgs, but roles endure
People have several roles (e.g., mother, wife, manager, friend)
Role-taking: accepting the role as seen by others and performing it (role senders and role takers)
Position roles (e.g., title) and functional (i.e., “go to person”/socially derived)
Role conflict (one role often rises to the top)…at the heart of work-family research
Ties to identity and work engagement research
Structure Behavior
Bandura 1986; 1991; 2013
Social Cognitive Theory
Reciprocal relationship between intrapersonal, behaviors, and environment
Efficacy beliefs are most central mechanism of human agency…efficacy is developed by:
- mastery (i.e., persevering)
- social modeling (not imitation; can be seen as creative)
- social persuasion
- internal physical/emotional states
People self-regulate by evaluating their performances and reacting/adapting depending on the outcome…they also generate expectations about outcomes based on the belief in their capabilities
Later research included the moral agency component and the future is applying the theory to collectives
Moral Agency: Monitor, Assess, React…people regulate to avoid self-sanctions
Moral disengagement:
- justifying means for worthy ends
- displace/diffuse personal responsibility
- minimize/distort impact of actions
- dehumanize victims
