CH-1-2 Introduction to the Field of Organizational Behaviour – Organisational Behaviour: Emerging Knowledge, Global Insights : Book Guide

This Document Contains Chapters 1 to 2 1. Introduction to the Field of Organizational Behaviour SOLUTIONS TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS 1. A friend suggests that organizational behaviour courses are useful only to people who will enter management careers. Discuss the accuracy of your friend’s statement. Answer: This chapter begins by saying that this book is about people working in organizations. Undoubtedly, many individuals will specialize in a distinct field of study and enter careers other than management. However, they too will be members in work organizations. As such, the three main reasons for studying organizational behaviour (understanding, predicting, influencing) will benefit them as well. You may think of this technical knowledge/ skills as providing “what” you need to know and be able to do to be successful in your chosen field. On the other hand, OB knowledge benefits everyone by addressing the people issues needed to apply technical knowledge and skills. Knowledge of OB provides valuable knowledge of “how” to address these people issues when applying accounting, marketing, engineering and other ideas in organizational settings. Ultimately, an individual’s career success is largely determined by his or her ability to understand and apply concepts in motivation, communication, team dynamics and other OB topics. 2. A young college or university student from Canada is interested in doing international business across China, India, Brazil, and Russia. Discuss how the knowledge of OB can be useful to the student. Answer: The study of OB is for anyone who works in an organization. If a student from Canada is interested in doing international business across the emerging economies, Brazil, Russia, China and India, s/he will need to work as an individual, in groups and teams or in an organization with those from the other countries. In either case, s/he needs to understand how people think, feel, and do in and around organizations. The study of OB looks at employee behaviour, decisions, perceptions and emotional responses at multiple levels, individual, teams and organizations; as well as how organizations interact with the external environment. Thus, knowledge acquired by study of OB can provide the student an understanding of these aspects of organizations and behaviour and thus help in getting things done while doing international business. 3. After hearing a seminar on organizational learning, a mining company executive argues that this perspective ignores the fact that mining companies could not rely on knowledge alone to stay in business. They also need physical capital (such as digging and ore processing equipment) and land (where the minerals are located). In fact, these two may be more important than what employees carry around in their heads. Evaluate the mining executive’s comments. Answer: Some executives still view land and capital as a company’s most valuable assets. They give lip service to the idea that “People are our most value assets” but still don’t understand that land and capital have little value without people. For instance, this mining company would not have found land with ore deposits unless it had the knowledge to find those minerals. It could not operate the equipment to extract and refine the ore unless it had enough knowledge. The executive’s comment that companies cannot remain in business with only knowledge is incorrect. On the contrary, some of the wealthiest organizations (including many software companies and consulting firms) have few physical assets. Many firms have sold their headquarters and other buildings because their competitive advantage – their source of wealth – is found in knowledge. Mining companies are also outsourcing several aspects of physical assets. Their ships and rail cars are often owned by others. The digging equipment is leased or owned by companies that specialize in drilling. The major oil companies today are mainly in the knowledge business – prospecting for minerals or marketing what others have found and extracted. This question also suggests a subtle misunderstanding by the executive about organizational learning. Although much corporate knowledge resides in the brains of its employees (called human capital), it also resides in the organization’s systems and structures (known as structural capital). 4. It is said that the CEO and other corporate leaders are keepers of the organization’s memory. Please discuss this. Answer: The organization’s so called “memory” is knowledge gleaned through the storage and preservation of intellectual capital but it also includes knowledge held by key employees. Some of that knowledge is explicit knowledge that core members can access easily, but some of that knowledge is not easily documented, and is called “tacit” knowledge. We believe that knowledge (widely known or tacit) can be transferred through systems, processes, people—which is tantamount to sharing of best practices. However, when those learnings cease to provide any value proposition to the organization, “unlearning” needs to occur. This is essentially a process whereby people, structures, systems, processes erase the knowledge that no longer is a value add to the firm. So replacing dysfunctional policies (i.e., time clocks for knowledge workers engaged in globally distributed work; removing dress codes and other etiquette formalities are examples of erasing old processes that no longer work in our globalized world. 5. A common refrain among executives is “People are our most important asset.” Relate this statement to any two of the four perspectives of organizational effectiveness presented ion this chapter. Does this statement apply better to some perspectives than to others? Why or why not? Answer: This is an open discussion question because the statement can relate to all four perspectives of organizational effectiveness. Open systems – probably the least focus on employees of the four perspectives. People represent the internal subsystems of organizations, so are vital in that respect. Some employees are also “boundary spanners” in that they link the organization to the external environment. Organizational learning – this perspective views employees as reasonably important because they hold a large portion of intellectual capital (human capital and possibly some forms of relationship capital). People bring knowledge into the organization and are largely responsible for sharing that knowledge. Knowledge use is also ultimately a human endeavour. High performance work practices – arguably the perspective that views people (employees) as the most critical resource. HPWPs embrace the human capital model; they consider employees as competitive advantage. HPWPs are practices to leverage or unleash the competitive advantage potential of employees. Stakeholder – Employees are one type of stakeholder, so the statement applies to this perspective. It recognizes that employees have a vested interest in the organization and its actions. 6. Corporate social responsibility is one of the hottest issues in corporate boardrooms these days, partly because it is becoming increasingly important to employees and other stakeholders. In your opinion, why have stakeholders given CSR more attention recently? Does abiding by CSR standards potentially cause companies to have conflicting objectives with some stakeholders in some situations? Answer: These questions are open to speculation and debate. Many will suggest that CSR has become more important because of global warming, loss of habitat, and other highly visible indicators of problems. In addition, a few might argue that increasing wealth allows society to raise the bar on companies by demanding that they contribute more to society. Still others might suggest that globalization has brought developed world companies closer to people in poverty and countries in need of better health standards. Students may state that corporate scandals have raised CSR as a priority. Other reasons include the preference of stakeholders wanting to be associated with organizations that are deemed socially responsible. This preference has not gone unnoticed in corporate boardrooms. A growing number of companies are equating social responsibility with increased profitability. As a result, they are changing the way they do business. They reason that CSR can be leveraged as a competitive advantage in the market. Regarding the conflicting objectives, many students would agree. After all, the textbook states that companies can’t satisfy all stakeholders because there are limited resources and stakeholders have conflicting goals. But some corporate leaders have suggested that there is less conflict then assumed. They particularly believe that satisfying communities and the environment ultimately satisfies the needs of shareholders and employees. 7. Look through the list of chapters in this textbook and discuss how globalization could influence each organizational behaviour topic. Answer: This is an open-ended question which could be used as an exercise activity with subsequent class discussion. The main objective is to help students understand how globalization has profound implications for behaviour in organizations. Here are some of the topics linked to globalization. Students will certainly identify others: • Teams • Employee motivation • Perception • Values • Communication • Stress • Communicating in organizational settings • Interpersonal conflict • Leadership • Organizational change 8. “Organizational theories should follow the contingency approach.” Comment on the accuracy of this statement. Answer: OB theories must be simple, yet accurate. While simplicity calls for universal theories, accuracy usually requires the contingency approach because most human behaviour is too complex to understand sufficiently through universal (i.e., one best way) theories. Contingency theories are more refi ned because they recognize that environmental and personal characteristics moderate most cause-effect relationships. In other words, while it would be preferable to use universal theories for the sake of simplicity, we often must rely on contingency theories to sufficiently understand and predict organizational behaviour. 9. What does “evidence-based management” mean? Describe situations where you have heard about companies practicing evidence-based management, as well as situations where companies have relied on fads that lacked sufficient evidence of their worth. Answer: There are two parts to this question. The first requires students to define what “evidence-based management” is. The second part asks students to provide an example of fads that lacked evidence, but which companies relied on in the past. Answers to the second part will vary based on individual student experiences. A sample answer to the first part of the question “evidence-based management” may include the following: Evidence–based management is the idea that management decisions and initiatives should be based on the systematic research anchor to ensure effective implantation. In other words, we should manage the workplace based on sound evidence gathered as a result of systematic research. This involves using knowledge flowing from the process of: forming research questions, systematically collecting data, and testing hypotheses against those data. Applying evidence-based management would prevent corporate leaders from embracing fads and relying on their pet beliefs before finding out if they actually work. Evidence-based management (EBM) refers to the practice of making managerial decisions and organizational practices informed by the best available evidence from scientific research, professional expertise, and organizational data. It involves critically evaluating and applying data to improve outcomes and efficiency. Examples of Evidence-Based Management: 1. Google's HR practices: Google uses data analytics to determine the best approaches for hiring, managing, and retaining employees. Their Project Oxygen, which identified key behaviors of effective managers, is an example of EBM. 2. Lean Manufacturing: Companies like Toyota use evidence-based principles in their production processes to eliminate waste and improve efficiency. Examples of Management Based on Fads: 1. Open Office Plans: Many companies adopted open office layouts believing they would enhance collaboration and productivity. However, research has shown that such layouts can lead to decreased productivity and employee satisfaction. 2. Six Sigma: While successful in manufacturing contexts, its application in other industries has often been more about following the trend rather than based on solid evidence of its effectiveness in those areas. CASE STUDY: ANCOL LTD. Case Synopsis This case describes the activities of Paul Simard after he became when he became manager at Ancol Ltd.’s plant in Jonquiere, Quebec. To build trust between management and employees, he removed the time clocks that kept track of employee work hours. Although employees appreciated this freedom to work without a time clock, some abused this privilege by showing up late and leaving early. This affected plant productivity. Supervisors spent more time counselling those who had attendance problems and filling out letters of reprimand. The letters, along with supervisors’ poor interpersonal skills, worsened relations. Another supervisor was added to cope with the additional work. After nine months, Simard agreed with union officials to reinstate the time clocks. Later, at a meeting of other Ancol managers, Simard learned that a similar situation had occurred at another plant a few years earlier. [NOTE: This case is a variation of an incident described in R. Daft, Organizational Theory, 3rd ed. (St. Paul, MN: West, 1989), pp. 16-17.] Suggested Answers to Discussion Questions 1. Discuss the consequences of the time clock removal on Ancol’s effectiveness as an organization using any two of the perspectives of organizational effectiveness. Answer: Open Systems Perspective: The Ancol case nicely illustrates the problems facing organizations from an open systems perspective. The open systems view states that organizations are comprised of interdependent parts. We certainly see that here with the removal of time clocks. In particular, we see how removing time clocks leads to a string of unexpected consequences. In this case, removing the time clocks resulted in more work for supervisors. It also affected work activities in payroll and, eventually, posed a new set of problems for labour union leaders. Supervisors now had to use disciplinary counselling skills which many of them lacked. Although students might suggest that lack of counselling training is a problem here, notice that there is no mention that it was a problem before. It is possible in a unionized environment with process-oriented technology, that control systems are in place which minimize the need for supervisors to discipline employees. For example, time clocks control employee attendance behaviour or, at least, provide fact-based information. The main point, however, is that one action (removing time clocks) ripples through to other subsystems in the organization, as predicted by the open systems anchor. SUGGESTION: Instructors might indicate at the outset of the case that this is a problem of organizations as systems. Student might then be asked to document the interdependencies. Each discussion group is asked to illustrate the events at Ancol from a systems perspective. The results are fascinating. Typically, some groups will diagram the systems model. Their drawing reveals the subsystems in the case, such as employees, supervisors, control systems (time clock), and management. It may also show inputs (such as Paul Simard’s entry), outputs (lower productivity), and feedback from the environment (union grievances). Other student groups might try to diagram the relationships that affect each other, such as a series of interrelated lines among the subsystems within the organization. A third type of drawing illustrates the cause-effect relationships in a time sequence. This typically starts with the poor relations, then removing the time clock, then initially increasing morale but also increasing absenteeism, and so on. This temporal image should reveal the complexity of events in the case. For example, poor relations was not the only cause of the removed time clocks. Paul Simard’s entry to the organization and his knowledge from the seminar also contribute to this action. (Instructors might notice how this is a classic example of garbage can decision making – a problem, solution, decision maker, and situation collide to form a decision. This case also illustrates poor organizational learning. The end of the case describes how Sims attended an operations meeting at Ancol’s headquarters in Cincinnati, where he learned that Ancol’s plant in Portland, Oregon had a similar experience six or seven years earlier. This illustrates the “silos of knowledge” problem that exists in large organizations. If Sims had known about the earlier incident, he might have avoided the action of removing time locks, or might have taken steps to correct anticipated problems. Organizational Learning Perspective: This case illustrates the problems facing organizations from an open systems view. The open systems view states that organizations are comprised of interdependent parts. We certainly see that here with the removal of time clocks. In particular, we see how removing time clocks leads to a string of unexpected consequences. In this case, removing the time clocks resulted in more work for supervisors. It also affected work activities in payroll and, eventually, posed a new set of problems for labour union leaders. Supervisors now had to use disciplinary counselling skills which many of them lacked. Although students might suggest that lack of counselling training is a problem here, notice that there is no mention that it was a problem before. It is possible in a unionized environment with process-oriented technology, that control systems are in place which minimize the need for supervisors to discipline employees. For example, time clocks control employee attendance behaviour or, at least, provide fact-based information. The main point, however, is that one action (removing time clocks) ripples through to other subsystems in the organization, as predicted by the open systems anchor. 1. What changes should occur to minimize the likelihood of these problems in the future? Answer: One answer to this question is to help people at Ancol recognize that organizations are open systems with interdependent parts. In other words, they need to be sensitive to the fact that changes in one part of the work unit affects other parts of the work unit, as we saw at this Ancol plant. The second change is to apply knowledge management practices so that what was previously learned about removing time clocks would be more quickly and readily known throughout the organization. The end of the case describes how Simard attended an operations meeting at Ancol’s headquarters, where he learned that another Ancol plant had a similar experience six or seven years earlier. This illustrates the “silos of knowledge” problem that exists in large organizations. If Simard had known about the earlier incident, he might have avoided the action of removing time locks, or might have taken steps to correct anticipated problems. Students should discuss ways that organizations such as Ancol can improve knowledge sharing. For example, the organization-wide meeting that Simard attended seems to help share knowledge among plant managers, albeit somewhat too late in this case. Alternatively, perhaps the company could leverage the benefits of Intranet technology to help employees and managers share experiences more fully. Even through an integrated email system, Simard could have asked other managers if removing time clocks has been tried before, and with what consequences. Notice that knowledge sharing requires a culture of open communication and information sharing, not just the technology to make this possible. WEB EXERCISE: DIAGNOSING ORGANIZATIONAL STAKEHOLDERS Purpose This exercise is designed to help students understand how stakeholders influence organizations as part of the open systems anchor. Materials Students need to select a company and, prior to class, retrieve and analyze publicly available information over the past year or two about that company. This may include annual reports, which are usually found on the web sites of publicly-traded companies. Where possible, students should also scan full-text newspaper and magazine databases for articles published over the previous year about the company. Instructions The instructor may have students work alone or in groups for this activity. Students will select a company and will investigate the relevance and influence of various stakeholder groups on the organization. Stakeholders will be identified from annual reports, newspaper articles, web site statements, and other available sources. Stakeholders should be ranked ordered in terms of their perceived importance to the organization. Students should be prepared to present or discuss their organization’s rank ordering of stakeholders, including evidence for this rank ordering. Discussion Questions 1. What are the main reasons certain stakeholders are more important than others for this organization? Answer: To answer the question, we need to analyze the importance of various stakeholders to an organization and rank them based on their influence and relevance. The main reasons certain stakeholders are more important than others can generally be attributed to the following factors: 1. Financial Contribution and Investment: • Investors and Shareholders: They provide capital and expect returns on their investments, which directly influence the financial stability and strategic direction of the company. 2. Regulatory and Legal Authority: • Government and Regulatory Bodies: They establish the rules and regulations within which the company operates. Compliance with these laws is crucial for legal and operational continuity. 3. Economic Impact: • Customers and Clients: They are the primary source of revenue. Customer satisfaction and loyalty directly impact sales, market share, and profitability. 4. Operational Support: • Employees and Labor Unions: Employees are essential for the daily operations and long-term success of the organization. Their skills, motivation, and well-being affect productivity and innovation. 5. Supply Chain and Partnerships: • Suppliers and Vendors: Reliable suppliers are crucial for maintaining product quality and timely delivery. They influence the organization's production and cost structures. 6. Public Perception and Media: • Media and Community: Media coverage can shape public perception and influence brand reputation. Community support can also play a significant role in the company's social license to operate. 7. Environmental and Social Considerations: • Environmental Groups and NGOs: These stakeholders can impact the company's reputation and operational practices, especially regarding environmental sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Rank Ordering Stakeholders: The ranking can vary based on the company's industry, geographic location, and specific circumstances. For instance, a technology company might prioritize innovation and customer satisfaction, placing employees and customers at the top, while a manufacturing firm might emphasize regulatory compliance and supplier relationships. Evidence for Rank Ordering: • Annual Reports: Provide insights into the company's financial health, investor relations, and strategic priorities. • News Articles: Offer perspectives on public perception, regulatory challenges, and major events affecting the company. • Company Statements: Indicate the organization's mission, values, and engagement with different stakeholder groups. Conclusion: Certain stakeholders are more important than others because of their direct impact on the company's financial performance, legal standing, operational efficiency, and public image. The priority given to each stakeholder group can be observed through the company's communication, strategic decisions, and resource allocation. 2. On the basis of your knowledge of the organization’s environmental situation, is this rank order of stake- holders in the organization’s best interest, or should other specific stakeholders be given higher priority? Answer: To determine whether the current rank order of stakeholders aligns with the organization's best interests, it's essential to consider the organization's environmental situation, which includes the competitive landscape, regulatory environment, social dynamics, and economic conditions. The ranking of stakeholders should reflect their influence on the organization's ability to achieve its strategic objectives and maintain a positive reputation. Key Considerations for Re-evaluating Stakeholder Priorities: 1. Economic Conditions: • Current Prioritization: If the organization is in a stable economic condition with strong financial performance, investors and shareholders may be a top priority to maintain and grow investments. • Re-evaluation: In an economic downturn or market volatility, customers might become more critical to sustain revenue, necessitating a shift in focus toward customer retention and satisfaction. 2. Regulatory Environment: • Current Prioritization: Regulatory bodies may be prioritized highly in industries with stringent regulations (e.g., finance, healthcare). • Re-evaluation: If there are upcoming regulatory changes or heightened scrutiny, the organization might need to allocate more resources to compliance and public relations efforts. 3. Technological Advancements and Innovation: • Current Prioritization: In industries driven by innovation, such as technology or pharmaceuticals, employees and R&D partners may be prioritized due to their role in product development. • Re-evaluation: If competitors are rapidly advancing, the company might need to shift focus towards partnerships and alliances to accelerate innovation. 4. Social and Environmental Responsibility: • Current Prioritization: Companies increasingly prioritize environmental groups and NGOs due to rising public concern over sustainability. • Re-evaluation: If there is a heightened public focus on environmental issues, the company may need to elevate these stakeholders to mitigate risks related to reputation and compliance with new environmental regulations. 5. Market Dynamics: • Current Prioritization: In a highly competitive market, customers and suppliers may be prioritized to maintain a competitive edge. • Re-evaluation: If market dynamics shift, such as new entrants or changes in consumer preferences, the organization may need to reallocate focus towards marketing and customer engagement. Assessment of Current Ranking: To determine if the current ranking aligns with the organization's best interests, consider the following: • Alignment with Strategic Goals: Does the ranking support the company's long-term vision and immediate objectives? • Risk Management: Are the prioritized stakeholders capable of mitigating the most significant risks the organization faces? • Opportunities for Growth: Does the ranking facilitate capitalizing on new opportunities in the market? Conclusion and Recommendations: • If the current environmental situation suggests that certain stakeholders have gained or lost influence, the organization should adjust the ranking accordingly. For instance, if there's an increased regulatory focus, regulatory bodies should move up in priority. Alternatively, if the company faces a significant public relations challenge, media and community stakeholders might need greater attention. • It’s crucial for the organization to remain agile and responsive to changes in the external environment, regularly reassessing the importance of stakeholders to maintain alignment with the company's goals and market realities. 3. What societal groups, if any, are not mentioned as stakeholders by the organization? Does this lack of reference to these unmentioned groups make sense? Answer: To answer this question, students should conduct a thorough review of the company's publicly available information, including annual reports, news articles, and website statements. The objective is to identify any societal groups that are not explicitly mentioned as stakeholders by the organization. Here are steps to approach this analysis and possible reasons for the lack of reference to certain groups: Steps to Identify Unmentioned Stakeholder Groups: 1. Review Company Documents: • Annual Reports: Check for mentions of key stakeholder groups such as investors, employees, customers, suppliers, and regulatory bodies. • News Articles: Look for coverage of the company's interactions with various societal groups. • Company Website and Statements: Examine corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports, sustainability statements, and press releases for any stakeholder mentions. 2. Consider Potential Stakeholder Groups: • Local Communities: Especially relevant if the company has significant operations in specific regions. • Environmental and Advocacy Groups: Important for companies with environmental impact or those in controversial industries. • Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs): Particularly if the company operates in areas with humanitarian concerns. • Cultural and Ethnic Groups: Relevant in regions with significant cultural diversity or where the company markets specific products. • Educational Institutions: If the company is involved in partnerships or recruitment from educational entities. 3. Analyze the Company's Sector and Context: • Consider the industry, geographical presence, and social issues relevant to the company's operations. Analysis and Justification for Unmentioned Groups: 1. Relevance to the Company's Operations: • If certain societal groups are not mentioned, it could be due to their limited impact on the company's core business activities. For example, if a tech company primarily operates online and has minimal physical presence, local communities may not be a significant stakeholder. 2. Strategic Focus and Priorities: • The company's strategic focus may prioritize certain stakeholders over others. For instance, a B2B company may focus more on clients and suppliers than individual consumers. 3. Risk Management and Sensitivity: • The lack of mention could be a deliberate choice to avoid drawing attention to sensitive issues. For example, a company operating in politically unstable regions might avoid highlighting relationships with certain governmental or non-governmental entities. 4. Omission or Oversight: • In some cases, the absence of reference may be an oversight or a reflection of the company's limited engagement with that group. This might indicate a potential area for improvement in stakeholder relations and corporate responsibility. Conclusion: The absence of mention of specific societal groups as stakeholders could be justified based on the company's operational focus, strategic priorities, and context. However, it might also indicate areas where the company can improve its engagement and transparency. Students should critically assess whether the omission makes sense given the company's circumstances or whether it reflects a gap in the company's stakeholder management approach. Comments for Instructors In this era of web savvy students, this activity fits nicely into student preferences. It allows students to collect information in ways that they have become familiar, yet requires them to engage in active learning by searching for information and critical thinking by evaluating the information they find. Most instructors will use this activity as a take-home exercise or assignment. However, for those with in-class computer labs (or wireless internet and student laptops), this can be a fun challenge in a one-hour exercise. As long as students understand the concept of stakeholders and perhaps the instructor has confirmed the availability of annual reports and other valuable information for several companies, the in-class version of this activity can prove to be an exciting challenge for students. There are several places and ways for students to collect stakeholder information for a specific company. Most of the information can be found on the company’s web site, but Google and other search engines might assist by identifying relevant articles in newspapers and magazines. In schools where students have access to several full-text databases, the instructor may need to specify whether students should use these sources. Along with searching and identifying relevant information about stakeholders, this assignment requires students to rank order the importance of these stakeholders. Instructors should expect students to justify their rank ordering, thereby providing a higher-order level of learning in the process. SELF-ASSESSMENT: IT ALL MAKES SENSE? Purpose This exercise is designed to help students comprehend how organizational behaviour knowledge can help them understand life in organizations. Instructions (Note: This activity may be done as a self-assessment or as a team activity.) Students are asked to read each of the statements and circle whether the statement is true or false, in their opinion. The class will consider the answers to each question and discuss the implications for studying organizational behaviour. After reviewing these statements, the instructor will provide information about the most appropriate answer. Comments for Instructors This exercise addresses the point that common sense isn’t always correct. Of course, some students will be counterintuitive in anticipation that these are “trick” questions. We have included some true statements to complicate the exercise. By reviewing each statement, you can help students to see that organizational behaviour systematically studies these issues and helps us to correct or clarify popular misperceptions. Here are the eleven statements with their correct answers and references to their discussion in the textbook. 1. A happy worker is a productive worker. Answer: TRUE. To be more accurate, the answer is “true, to some extent”. This is one of those “truths” that students will probably answer correctly and many OB instructors will answer incorrectly because they rely on old organizational behaviour research. The latest research indicates that job satisfaction has a moderately strong association with job performance (a correlation of around .30). For details, see Chapter 4 on workplace emotions and attitudes. 2. A decision maker’s effectiveness increases with the number of choices or alternatives available to him or her. Answer: FALSE. At some point when the number of alternatives increases, the decision maker becomes less efficient and effective in choosing among those alternatives (see Chapter 7). When the number of alternatives is very large, decision makers reduce their motivation to decide such that they avoid thinking about the decision at all! The main reason is that decision makers are able and motivated to process a finite amount of information. As the number of alternatives increases, decision makers are faced with dramatically more information to consider, because each choice has several bits of information about factors to consider. One could argue that having very few choices is also less effective, but this would be true only if the environment offers many choices and the alternatives available to the decision maker are not among the best ones. 3. Organizations are more effective when they minimize conflict among employees. Answer: FALSE. Actually, the correct answer is in a state of flux. The dominant OB research indicates that task conflict is often beneficial (such as in decision making) whereas relationship conflict has negative consequences. But research now concludes that even task conflict can be a problem because it generates relationship conflict (i.e. difficult to separate them). We discuss this topic in Chapter 11. 4. Employees have more power with many close friends than with many acquaintances. Answer: FALSE. Social network research reports that people with many “weak ties” (many acquaintances) tend to have more career success and related outcomes in their lives than those with mainly strong ties (close friends). The main reason is that weak ties provide less redundant social capital. Acquaintances gives us unique information (expert power), unique connections and opportunities (referent power), wider visibility, and so forth. Close friends tend to give us information faster and give us more opportunities, but these resources tend to be similar across our close friends. See Chapter 10 for details. 5. Companies are most successful when they have strong corporate cultures. Answer: FALSE. As with so many organizational behaviour concepts, the more precise answer is “it depends.” Chapter 14 explains that there is a weak relationship between corporate culture strength and organizational performance. Three reasons are offered. First, a strong culture can be a problem when the values are inconsistent with the organization’s environment. Second, a very strong culture can blind employees from seeing other perspectives. Third, a very strong culture suppresses dissenting values that may be important in the future as the environment changes. 6. Employees perform better without stress. Answer: FALSE. As we learn in Chapter 4, some level of stress is essential for life. We need a certain level of stress to energize us. The problem is that we sometimes (or often) experience stress beyond this beneficial level. 7. The best way to change people and organizations is by pinpointing the source of their current problems. Answer: FALSE. This statement refers to the dominant model of problem solving and organizational change, namely, to identify the problem before looking for solutions. In contrast, emerging knowledge suggests that a positive rather than problem-focused approach may be more effective in many or most circumstances. We discuss this first in Chapter 5 under the topic of strengths-based coaching and feedback. Research indicates that focussing on an employee’s weaknesses (problems) creates defensiveness to such an extend that its undermines any potential benefits of such a Discussion. In Chapter 15, we introduce the approach to organizational change called appreciative inquiry. According to this model, dwelling on problems can bog down the change process and degenerate into political quagmires. Instead, change agents need to focus the group on its potential and positive elements. 8. Female leaders involve employees in decisions to a greater degree than do male leaders. Answer: TRUE. There is lot of debate about whether men and women lead differently. As we learn at the end of Chapter 12, men and women are mostly similar in their leadership styles. But there is one exception: female leaders involve employees in decisions to a greater degree than do male leaders. Of course, some female leaders are not participative, and some male leaders are very participative. But generally, female leaders are more participative. 9. The best decisions are made without emotion. Answer: FALSE. The truth is, all decisions involve emotion and require emotion. Without emotion, people are unable to recognize problems and opportunities, and are unable to make choices. As explained in Chapter 7 (and noted in Chapters 3, 4, and 5), people form emotionally anchored preferences before they consciously think about the issue. Indeed, our “awareness” of a problem or opportunity is an emotional reaction to sensory information. Although our rational thought process can evaluate information, those conclusions must be processed by our emotional centre(s) in order to make a choice. An important point here is that emotions are an inherent and essential part of human behaviour. This is different from “getting emotional”, which occurs when emotions are so strong that they influence our actions without conscious control. 10. If employees feel they are paid unfairly, then nothing other than changing their pay will reduce their feelings of injustice. Answer: FALSE. When it comes to money, people tend to play interesting mind games to avoid feeling over reward inequity. Students will read in Chapter 5 that underpaid (under rewarded) employees might reduce the injustice by working less, taking non-monetary resources, changing the comparison other, or leaving the field (such as quitting). This question also needs to consider that “injustice” is affected just as much by procedures as by distribution. Thus, injustice might be reduced by allowing appeals, ensuring the decision maker considers all information, ensuring that the under rewarded employees is treated with respect, and ensuring that he/she is given an opportunity to stated his/her views (voice). 2. Individual Behaviour, Personality, and Values SOLUTIONS TO CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS 1. A provincial government department has high levels of absenteeism among the office staff. The head of office administration argues that employees are misusing the organization’s sick leave benefits. However, some of the mostly female staff members have explained that family responsibilities interfere with work. Using the MARS model, as well as your knowledge of absenteeism behaviour, discuss some of the possible reasons for absenteeism here and how it might be reduced. Answer: The MARS model of individual behaviour states that behaviour is a function of motivation, ability, role perceptions, and situational factors. With respect to absenteeism, employees may be away from assigned work because they don’t want to attend work that day (motivation), they don’t realize that this is their work day (role perceptions), and/or environmental conditions prevent them from attending work (situational factors). In this incident, situational factors may explain mostly why female employees are absent. Specifically, family responsibilities interfere with their work attendance. However, some absenteeism among men and women may be due to sick leave policies. It is known that generous sick leave benefits reduce attendance motivation. 2. It has been said that all employees are motivated. Do you agree with this statement? Answer: All elements of the MARS model help us understand the critical influences on individual’s voluntary behaviour and performance. If any of those components is missing, then their subsequently behaviour and performance would likely not be high. But let’s take the case of motivation for example. Motivation can take many forms (direction), intensity and varying levels of persistence. The employee who comes in late, spends half his day gossiping at the coffee machine, and goes home with some property of the organization –is that person motivated? Yes, of course s/he is! It is just not motivation congruent with the organizations goals. So goal congruence is also important when we discuss motivation. Sometimes some of our most motivated employees do nothing! The organization’s goal is to ensure that the direction that motivation takes is congruent with the direction in which the organization is going! 3. Studies report that heredity has a strong influence on an individual’s personality. What are the implications of this in organizational settings? Answer: There are a number of issues that student might – and should – raise in response to this question. First, the strong effect of heredity suggests that applicant selection is an important way to improve job performance and employee well-being (by ensuring their work matches their personality). Although we might try to change an employees style of behaviour, their inherent style is strongly determined already. This is why many companies refer to “hire for attitude, train for skill” A second implication is that training for some types of behaviour (fun-oriented, detailed, talkative, etc.) might be less successful than employer assume. It would be better to transfer people into jobs that more closely match their personality. 4. All candidates applying for a management trainee position are given a personality test that measures the five dimensions in the five-factor model. Which personality traits would you consider to be the most important for this type of job? Explain your answer. Answer: The textbook provides some information to help students answer this question. First, conscientiousness and emotional stability (low neuroticism) are important because they best predict individual performance in almost every job group. Both are motivational components of personality because they energize a willingness to fulfill work obligations within established rules (conscientiousness) and to allocate resources to accomplish those tasks (emotional stability). Various studies have reported that conscientious employees set higher personal goals for themselves, are more motivated, and have higher performance expectations than do employees with low levels of conscientiousness. They also tend to have higher levels of organizational citizenship and work better in organizations that give employees more freedom than in traditional “command and control” workplaces. The other important personality dimension is extroversion, because it is associated with performance in sales and management jobs, where employees must interact with and influence people. One or more other personality dimensions might also be relevant to management trainees, but these three stand out. 5. Compare and contrast personality with personal values, and identify values categories in Schwartz’s values circumplex that likely relate to one or more personality dimensions in the five-factor personality model. Answer: This question has two parts. The first part (compare/contrast) involves defining both concepts and then pointing out similarities and differences. Personality is the relatively enduring pattern of thoughts, emotions, and behaviours that characterize a person, along with the psychological processes behind those characteristics. Values are stable, evaluative beliefs that guide our preferences for outcomes or courses of action in a variety of situations. Both concepts are characteristics of individuals, are relatively abstract, and have many dimensions (specific personality traits and specific individual values). The main difference between these two concepts is that personality is descriptive whereas values are evaluative. Personality refers (descriptively) to behavioural tendencies. Values refer to what people “ought” to do; they indicate that some things have more valence (good/ bad) than other things. A second distinction is that specific values conflict with other specific values, whereas personality traits have much less conflict with each other. A third distinction is that personality is more strongly influenced by heredity than are personal values. Heredity has some influence on our values, but socialization and life experience play a stronger role compared to the effect on personality. The second part of this question asks student to identify specific Schwartz’s values categories with personality dimensions. This is possible because personality and values are associated with each other. Several studies have reported correlations between Schwartz’s list of values and the Big Five personality dimensions. None of this detail is provided in the textbook, but students can try to associate personality traits with personal values through their definitions. The table below summarizes a meta-analysis of studies relating the Big Five personality dimensions with personal values: Exhibit: Meta-Analytic Results for Big Five Personality Dimensions and Personal Values (Schwartz Model) Conscientiousness Emotional Stability Extraversion Agreeableness Openness to Experience Power 0.19 –.34 Achievement 0.26 0.23 Hedonism Stimulation 0.11 0.26 0.29 Self-direction 0.49 Universalism 0.23 0.46 Benevolence 0.48 Conformity 0.29 0.05 –.35 Tradition 0.35 –.27 Security 0.22 –.02 0.07 Source: Parks, L., & Guay, R. P. (2009). Personality, values, and motivation. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(7), 675-684. For earlier writing on the relationships among personality traits and personal values, see: Olver, J. M., & Mooradian, T. A. (2003). Personality traits and personal values: a conceptual and empirical integration. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(1), 109-125; Aluja, A., & García, L. F. (2004). Relationships between Big Five personality factors and values. Social Behaviour & Personality, 32(7), 619-626. This table indicates the following: Openness to experience – generally the strongest association with specific values, particularly higher self direction, universalism, and stimulation, and lower conformity and tradition. Agreeableness – seems to have the 2nd highest link to specific values. these values include higher benevolence, tradition, and universalism, as well as lower power and security. Conscientiousness – This personality dimension has some connection to personal values, notably conformity, achievement, and security. Extraversion – This Big Five personality dimension is correlated significantly (all positively) with stimulation, achievement, and power. Emotional Stability (low neuroticism) – This personality dimension is reported to have the weakest association with any of Schwartz’s values. The three values that minimally relate are stimulation, conformity, and (barely) security. 6. This chapter discussed values congruence mostly in the context of an employee’s personal values versus the organization’s values. But values congruence also relates to the juxtaposition of other pairs of value systems. Explain how values congruence is relevant with respect to organizational versus professional values (i.e., values of a professional occupation, such as physician, accountant, pharmacist). Answer: The textbook explains that values congruence comes in different forms, such as individual with organization and organization with society. This question asks about values congruence between the organization and a professional group (accountants, lawyers, engineers, teachers etc.). For example, an engineer working for an auto manufacturer may be asked to design a gas tank that minimizes cost beyond established minimum engineering standards. In this case values incongruence may occur because the engineer’s profession dictates that public safety be paramount in all design considerations. 7. “All decisions are ethical decisions.” Comment on this statement, particularly by referring to the concepts of moral intensity and moral sensitivity. Answer: This statement is probably best viewed as false. For a decision to have an ethical dimension it has to have some moral intensity associated with it. Moral intensity is a characteristic of the situation. It refers to the degree to which an issue demands the application of ethical principles. “Who should be laid off?” would have high moral intensity. On the other hand, a decision to take an umbrella to work because it might rain has no moral intensity. This is because morally intense issues involve others in the society who may think the decision is good or evil, or the issue quickly affects people. A few people might argue that all decisions are ethical decisions because all decisions affect others in some way. There is always some tiny degree of moral intensity in all decisions, they would suggest. This argument implies that anything you decide or do (such as choosing to wake up 15 minutes earlier tomorrow morning) will affect others. We live in an interconnected world, but a contrary argument is that to be considered an ethical decision, a decision requires some minimum level of effect. A trivial effect (such as someone surprised to see you awake 15 minutes earlier tomorrow) would fall below a minimum threshold to be considered ethical. Also, an ethical decision necessarily requires the ability of the decision maker to be aware of possible consequences of the decision. You could not usually predict that waking 15 minutes earlier tomorrow would have a good or bad effect on others, so that decision is not considered an ethical decision. Moral sensitivity refers to a characteristic of the decision maker, not the situation. Faced with the same issue, two decision makers may be more or less moral sensitive. This means that people differ in their ability to recognize the presence and determine the relative importance of an ethical issue. Moral intensity and moral sensitivity are different, but they go hand-in-hand. An issue with high moral intensity might be decided without the required ethical consideration because the decision maker doesn’t recognize its ethical importance (i.e., the person has low moral sensitivity). Thus, both concepts are important factors in the extent to which we apply ethical principles to issues. 8. The organization that you have been working in for five years is now suffering from a global recession and it changes the compensation structure. Discuss the role of moral intensity, moral sensitivity and situational influences in this context. Answer: Moral intensity is the degree to which an issue demands application of ethical principles. In this situation, the organization is facing financial instability and needs your support, nevertheless, this is just one of the factors which contributes to the moral intensity of the issue. Moral sensitivity is a personal characteristic that enables people to recognize the presence of an ethical issue and determine its relative importance. Even after having worked for five years in the organization, it depends on you as a person, and also on the information that you have about the situation, higher moral sensitivity leads to higher empathy. Situational factors could be a pressure from top management, peer pressure, social pressure and family responsibilities, and your comfort zone within the organization. Based on these situational factors, you may choose to stay with the organization, accept the new compensation or look for work elsewhere. 9. People in a particular South American country have high power distance and high collectivism. What does this mean, and what are the implications of this information when you (a senior executive) visit employees working for your company in that country? Answer: In high power distance cultures, people tend to accept the power differential which exists in their society. This extends to the workplace as well. I would expect the employees to address me by my surname. I would not interpret this as being aloof or unfriendly. The social interchange between the employees and I would be formal. High collectivism would encourage me to celebrate the achievements of everyone as a group. Any discussion would emphasize and focus on improving or maintaining group harmony and teamwork. CASE STUDY: ETHICS DILEMMA VIGNETTES Purpose This exercise is designed to make students aware of the ethical dilemmas people face in various business situations, as well as the competing principles and values that operate in these situations. Instructions (Small Class) The instructor will form teams of 4 or 5 students. Team members will read each case below and discuss the extent to which the company’s action in each case was ethical. Teams should be prepared to justify their evaluation using ethics principles and perceived moral intensity of each incident. Instructions (Large Class) Working alone, students read each case below and determine the extent to which the company’s action in each case was ethical. The instructor will use a show of hands to determine the extent to which students believe case represents an ethical dilemma (high or low moral intensity), and the extent to which the main people or company in each incident acted ethically. Comments for Instructors There is, of course, no right answer to this exercise, but the process and application of ethics principles is important in the discussion. Students tend to get into debates about the merits and problems with each activity, but they also should dig deeper into the three ethics principles, and the moral intensity of each issue. Here are each of the vignettes along with background and comments: Case One A large European bank requires all employees to open a bank account with that bank. The bank deposits employee paycheques to those accounts. The bank explains that this is a formal policy which all employees agree to at the time of hire. Furthermore, failure to have an account with the bank shows disloyalty, which could limit the employee’s career advancement opportunities with the bank. Until recently, the bank has reluctantly agreed to deposit paycheques to accounts at other banks for a small percentage of employees. Now, bank executives want to reinforce the policy. They announced that employees have three months to open an account with the bank or face disciplinary action. Comments to instructors: This case occurred at Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS). (See “Royal Bank of Scotland Threatens Staff with Disciplinary Action,” Personnel Today, 23 March 2007.) This incident is fairly well-balanced with two sides to the story, and students should figure out the conflicting moral principles involved. On the one side, employees should have the freedom to make personal decisions outside work without being influenced unduly by the employer. As union officials mentioned in response to this incident, grocery store employees are free to buy groceries at competitor stores, so why should RBS employees be required to bank with their own bank. Furthermore, there may be a legal issue of whether the bank can refuse to pay employees where they have a standard bank account (even if at another bank). On the other hand, failure to use your own employer’s services is a sign of disrespect and disloyalty where those services are aimed at people similar to the employees. One might argue that failure to open an account at RBS should limit career opportunities because one would expect managers to demonstrate even more loyalty to the company. Perhaps most students would argue against disciplinary action, but a few might notice that employees agreed to this practice when they joined the organization. As such, failure to open a bank account may be a breach of the employment relationship Case Two A 16-year-old hired as an office administrator at a small import services company started posting her thoughts about the job on her Facebook site. After her first day, she wrote: “first day at work. omg!! So dull!!” Two days later, she complained “all i do is shred holepunch n scan paper!!! omg!” Two weeks later she added “im so totally bord!!!” These comments were intermixed with the other usual banter about her life. Her Facebook site did not mention the name of the company where she worked. Three weeks after being hired, the employee was called into the owner’s office, where he fired her for the comments on Facebook and then had her escorted from the building. The owner argues that these comments put the company in a bad light, and her “display of disrespect and dissatisfaction undermined the relationship and made it untenable.” Comments to instructors: This case occurred at a small industrial services business in the United Kingdom (see: A. Levy, “Teenage office worker sacked for moaning on Facebook about her 'totally boring' job,” Daily Mail, 26 February 2009). However, there are several similar cases involving Facebook, blogs, and other social media, where employees write negative comments about their employer. For example, this incident parallels two earlier cases in which (a) a Starbucks employee was fired for complaining about his boss’s decision on a work issue and (b) an employee who worked in marketing for government in northern Canada was fired for posting artistic photos of garbage in the snow. To some people, the case of the teenage Facebook complainer is a clear case of an employee who should be dismissed because she lacks sufficient commitment to and appreciation of the job. The company owner later explained to media: “We were looking for a long-term relationship with Miss Swann as we do with all our staff. Her display of disrespect and dissatisfaction undermined the relationship and made it untenable.” But others would say that the owner’s activities were unethical because (a) the owner was snooping on the employee’s private communication (although obviously open for others to read), (b) her statements may have been an accurate reflection of the work, (c) there is no evidence that her work performance was undermined by her statements or attitude, and (d) she did not name the company when writing these negative comments. To add interest to this class activity, look for the YouTube video in which the fired employee is interviewed. (Note: A news segment on this incident might still be available on YouTube.) Case Three Computer printer manufacturers usually sell printers at a low margin over cost and generate much more income from subsequent sales of the high-margin ink cartridges required for each printer. One global printer manufacturer now designs its printers so that they work only with ink cartridges sold in the same region. Ink cartridges purchased in Canada will not work with the same printer model sold in Europe, for example. This “region coding” of ink cartridges does not improve performance. Rather, it prevents consumers and grey marketers from buying the product at a lower price in another region. The company says this policy allows it to maintain stable prices within a region rather than continually changing prices due to currency fluctuations. Comments to instructors: This case refers to actions by Hewlett Packard (HP). (See David Pringle and Steve Stecklow, “Electronics with borders,” Wall Street Journal, 17 January 2005, B1.) Students might see both sides of the issue here. Although the sense of freedom to purchase globally may dominate the discussion, some students might agree with the concern that companies are buffeted by currency fluctuations to such an extent that they cannot adapt quickly enough to price changes and shifting supplies with those currency fluctuations. For instance, a large buyer of HP printer ink in Europe might ship much of that ink to Canada if the Euro rises appreciatively against the U.S. dollar, thereby causing a shortage of printer ink in Europe. Others may argue that this supply shift is a small portion of the supply of ink cartridges in most regions, so HP’s actions are unfair. In terms of moral intensity, students may realize that few people are affected by HP’s restrictions and that it has low proximity (not nearby), so moral intensity is low. In classes where most students believe there is no (or minimal) moral dilemma with HP’s actions, I show the newspaper article and ask why the story was on the front business page of a leading newspaper! Case Four Judy Price is a popular talk show radio personality and opinionated commentator on the morning phone-in show of a Toronto radio station. Ms. Price is married to John Tremble, a lawyer who was recently elected for the first time to the parliament of Ontario. He also became Minister of the Environment and Conservation in the newly formed government that defeated the previous government. The radio station’s board of directors is very concerned that the station’s perceived objectivity will be compromised if Ms. Price remains on air as a commentator and talk show host while her husband holds such a public position in the province. For example, the radio station manager believes that Ms. Price gave minimal attention to the Environment Ministry’s slow response to a leakage of toxic chemicals a week ago at a large manufacturing company. Ms. Price denied that her views are biased and argued that the incident didn’t merit as much attention as other issues that particular day. To ease the board’s concerns, the station manager has transferred Ms. Price from a talk show host and commentator to the hourly news reporting position, where most script is edited by others. Although technically a lower position, Ms. Price’s total salary package remains the same. Ms. Price is now seeking professional advice to determine whether the radio station’s action represents a form of discrimination on the basis of marital status. Comments to instructors: This case is based on a discrimination case in Canada. At issue is the station’s right to operate a business that maintains its integrity to the listeners, and the individual’s right to perform her job without consideration of marital status. The law in this case tends to side with the employee: employers cannot use broad categorizations (such as marital status) to make decisions about individual employees. Rather, they must rely on information specific to that person. At the same time, the other point of view is that the station did rely on information specific to this person; marital status was simply one piece of information in their determination of risk. At some point, the individual’s right must be limited by the employer’s right to minimize potential damage to the goodwill of its business. Case Five For the past few years, the design department of a small (40-employee) company has been using a particular software program, but the three employees who use the software have been complaining for more than a year that the software is out of date and is slowing down their performance. The department agreed to switch to a competing software program, costing several thousand dollars. However, the next version won’t be released for six months and buying the current version will not allow much discount on the next version. The company has put in advance orders for the next version. Meanwhile, one employee was able to get a copy of the current version of the software from a friend in the industry. The company has allowed the three employees to use this current version of the software even though they did not pay for it. Comments to instructors: This case is adapted from a real situation in another industry. It is undoubtedly common enough, and there are several variations of software piracy. The case refers to a practice that software companies would easily conclude is software piracy and therefore obviously unethical. Perhaps most students would concur, although many would support the company’s action on the grounds that the software firm would receive an unfair windfall (having one purchase just before the new version is released). Moral intensity figures strongly here. The company is small and only intends to purchase a few copies. The period of illegal use is also only six months. CLASS EXERCISE: TEST YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF PERSONALITY Purpose This exercise is designed to help students think about and understand the effects of the Big Five personality dimensions on individual preferences and outcomes. Instructions (Large Class) Below are several questions relating to the Big Five personality dimensions and various preferences or outcomes. Answer each of these questions relying on your personal experience or best guess. Later, the instructor will show you the answers based on scholarly results. You will not be graded on this exercise, but it may help you to better understand the effect of personality on human behaviour and preferences. Instructions (Small Class) 1. The instructor will organize students into teams. Members of each team work together to answer each of the questions below relating to the Big Five personality dimensions and various preferences or outcomes. 2. The instructor will reveal the answers based on scholarly results. (Note: The instructor might create a competition to see which team has the most answers correct.) Exercise Answers 1. You have been asked to select job applicants for a nine-month over-winter assignment working in an Antarctic research station with a dozen other people. Assuming that all candidates have equal skills, experience, and health, identify the level of each personality dimension that would be best for people working in these remote, confined, and isolated conditions. Answer: Conscientiousness – average (but possibly below average relating to : high tolerance to lack of achievement and low need for order) Agreeableness – above average Neuroticism – Low (relatively high emotional stability) (this seems to be the most significant factor) Openness to experience – above average, but ambiguous findings because also high tolerance of lack of stimulation and does not become bored easily Extroversion – below average (i.e., moderately introverted and low need for social interaction, “but socially adept”) Sources: Musson, D. M., Sandal, G. M., Harper, M., & Helmreich, R. L. (2002). Personality testing in antarctic expeditioners; cross cultural comparisons and evidence for generalizability, 53rd International Astronautical Congress, The World Space Congress. Houston: International Astronautical Federation; Sarris, A. (2006). Personality, Culture Fit, and Job Outcomes on Australian Antarctic Stations. Environment and Behaviour, 38(3), 356-372; Palinkas, L. A., & Suedfeld, P. (2008). Psychological effects of polar expeditions. The Lancet, 371(9607), 153-163. 2. Listed below are several jobs. Please check no more than two personality dimensions that you believe are positively associated with preferences for each occupation. Answer: Budget analyst: Conscientiousness Corporate executive: Extroversion Engineer: Openness to experience Journalist: Openness to experience Life insurance agent: Extroversion Nurse: Extroversion and agreeableness Physician: Extroversion and agreeableness Production supervisor: Conscientiousness Public relations director: Openness to experience Research analyst: openness to experience School teacher: extroversion and agreeableness Sculptor: openness to experience Sources: Furnham, A., (2001) “Vocational preference and P-O fit: Reflections on Holland’s Theory of Vocational Choice,” Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50 (1), pp. 5-29; Tett, Robert P., and Dawn D. Burnett. "A personality trait-based interactionist model of job performance." Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 3 (2003): 500-517; Barrick, M. R. Murray R., M. K. Michael K. Mount, and R. Rashmi Gupta. "Meta-analysis of the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and Holland's occupational types." Personnel psychology 56, no. 1 (2003): 45. NOTE: There is ongoing debate regarding the association between vocational preference and personality. Sullivan & Hanson (2004) report that subdimensions of the Big 5 are better predictors of vocational interest than are the overall dimensions (e.g. subdimensions of extroversion – such as enthusiasm and sociability). Assignment of some of these personality dimensions to specific occupations may be based on limited data. Also, although these are identified as the most significant personality predictors, other five-factor dimensions also likely have a significant influence on occupational preferences. 3. On which two personality dimensions should team members have the highest scores, on average, to produce the best team performance? Answer: agreeableness and conscientiousness To produce the best team performance, team members should generally have high scores on the following two personality dimensions: 1. Conscientiousness: Conscientiousness is associated with traits such as being diligent, organized, dependable, and responsible. Team members with high conscientiousness are more likely to be reliable, follow through on commitments, and pay attention to detail. These traits contribute to better planning, goal-setting, and overall task performance, which are crucial for team success. 2. Agreeableness: Agreeableness relates to being cooperative, kind, and supportive. High agreeableness fosters a collaborative and harmonious team environment, promoting effective communication, conflict resolution, and mutual respect. This dimension is essential for building trust and fostering a positive team climate, which can enhance overall team cohesion and effectiveness. While other personality dimensions like extraversion, openness to experience, and emotional stability (low neuroticism) can also be beneficial in certain contexts, conscientiousness and agreeableness are generally considered the most critical for team performance due to their direct impact on productivity and interpersonal dynamics. Source: Peeters, Miranda A. G., Harrie F. J. M. van Tuijl, Christel G. Rutte, and Isabelle M. M. J. Reymen."Personality and team performance: a meta-analysis." European Journal of Personality 20, no. 5 (2006): 377-396 4. Rank-order (1=highest, 5 =lowest) the Big Five personality dimensions in terms of how much you think they predict a person’s degree of life satisfaction. (Note: Personality dimensions are ranked by their absolute effect, so ignore the negative or positive direction of association.) Answer: Source: DeNeve, K. M., and H. Cooper. "The Happy Personality: A Meta-Analysis of 137 Personality Traits and Subjective Well-Being." Psychological Bulletin 124 (1998): 197-229. 5. Which two Big Five personality dimensions are positively associated with enjoyment of workplace humour? Answer: Extroversion and agreeableness have the highest correlation with attitudes toward having fun at work. The two Big Five personality dimensions that are positively associated with the enjoyment of workplace humor are: 1. Extraversion: Extraversion is characterized by sociability, assertiveness, and a tendency to seek out and enjoy social interactions. Extraverted individuals are generally more likely to enjoy and participate in humorous interactions in the workplace. They tend to be more outgoing, enthusiastic, and expressive, which makes them more receptive to humor and more likely to use humor as a way to engage with others. 2. Openness to Experience: Openness to experience involves a high level of creativity, curiosity, and a willingness to embrace new ideas and experiences. Individuals who score high on this dimension are often more open to diverse and unconventional forms of humor. They tend to appreciate clever, witty, and novel humor, which may include irony, satire, or intellectual jokes. Together, these personality traits contribute to a greater appreciation and enjoyment of humor in the workplace, as they foster a positive and engaging attitude towards playful and lighthearted interactions. Source: Karl et al, “Is fun for everyone? Personality differences in healthcare providers’ attitudes toward fun,” Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, Spring 2007, pp. 409-447 SELF-ASSESSMENT: ARE YOU INTROVERTED OR EXTROVERTED? Purpose This self-assessment is designed to help students to estimate the extent to which you are introverted or extroverted. Overview and Instructions The statements in this scale represent the 10-item introversion-extroversion scale in the International Personality Item Pool. This is the short version, so it estimates overall introversion-extroversion but not specific facets within the personality dimension. Students can use the scoring key in Appendix B to calculate their results, or complete the scale on the student CD for self-scoring. This exercise is completed alone so students assess themselves honestly without concerns of social comparison. Class discussion will focus on the meaning and implications of extroversion and introversion in organizations. Feedback for the IPIP Introversion-Extroversion Scale Extroversion characterizes people who are outgoing, talkative, sociable, and assertive. It includes several facets, such as friendliness, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity level, excitement-seeking, and cheerfulness. The opposite of extroversion is introversion, which refers to the personality characteristics of being quiet, shy, and cautious. Extroverts get their energy from the outer world (people and things around them), whereas introverts get their energy from the internal world, such as personal reflection on concepts and ideas. Introverts are more inclined to direct their interests to ideas rather than to social events. This is the short version of the IPIP Introversion-Extroversion Scale, so it estimates overall introversion-extroversion but not specific facets within the personality dimension. Scores range from 0 to 40. Low scores indicate introversion; high scores indicate extroversion. The norms in the following table are estimated from results of early adults (under 30 years old) in Scotland and undergraduate psychology students in the United States. However, introversion extroversion norms vary from one group to the next; the best norms are likely based on the entire class you are attending or with past students in this course. Score Interpretation 35-40 28-34 21-27 7-20 0-6 High extroversion Moderate extroversion In-between extroversion and introversion Moderate introversion High introversion Solution Manual for Organisational Behaviour: Emerging Knowledge, Global Insights Steven McShane, Mara Olekalns, Alex Newman, Angela Martin 9781760421649, 9780071016261