Chapter 5 PPT Presentation

Full-Circle Learning MyLab™: Learning Full Circle for Marketing,

Management, Business Communication, and Intro to Business

BEFORE CLASS

AFTER CLASS DURING

CLASS

Decision Sims, Videos, and Learning

Catalytics

DSMs, pre-lecture homework,

eText

Writing Space, Video

Cases, Quizzes/ Tests

MyLab

Critical Thinking

MyManagementLab®: Improves Student Engagement Before, During, and After Class

Decision Making

BREAKTHROUGH

Prep and Engagement

BREAK THRO

UGH

To better resultsTo better results

• Personal Inventory Assessments (PIA) – NEW! Online questionnaires designed to promote self- reflection and engagement in students, because students learn better when they can connect what they are learning to their personal experience. Student results include a written explanation along with a graphic display that shows how their results compared to the class as a whole. Instructors will also have access to this graphic representation of results to promote classroom discussion.

• NEW! VIDEO LIBRARY – Robust video library with over 100 new book-specific videos that include easy-to-assign assessments, the ability for instructors to add YouTube or other sources, the ability for students to upload video submissions, and the ability for polling and teamwork.

• Decision-making simulations – NEW and improved feedback for students. Place your students in the role of a key decision-maker! Simulations branch based on the decisions students make, providing a variation of scenario paths. Upon completion students receive a grade, as well as a detailed report of the choices and the associated consequences of those decisions.

• Video exercises – UPDATED with new exercises. Engaging videos that bring business concepts to life and explore business topics related to the theory students are learning in class. Quizzes then assess students’ comprehension of the concepts covered in each video.

• Learning Catalytics – A “bring your own device” student engagement, assessment, and classroom intelligence system helps instructors analyze students’ critical-thinking skills during lecture.

• Dynamic Study Modules (DSMs) – UPDATED with additional questions. Through adaptive learning, students get personalized guidance where and when they need it most, creating greater engagement, improving knowledge retention, and supporting subject-matter mastery. Also available on mobile devices.

• Writing Space – UPDATED with new commenting tabs, new prompts, and a new tool for students called Pearson Writer. A single location to develop and assess concept mastery and critical thinking, the Writing Space offers automatic graded, assisted graded, and create your own writing assignments, allowing you to exchange personalized feedback with students quickly and easily.

Writing Space can also check students’ work for improper citation or plagiarism by comparing it against the world’s most accurate text comparison database available from Turnitin.

http://www.pearsonmylabandmastering.com

Organizational Behavior

This page intentionally left blank

Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto Delhi Mexico City São Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo

Stephen P. Robbins —San Diego State University

Timothy A. Judge —University of Notre Dame

E D I T I o N

Organizational Behavior

17

Vice President, Business Publishing: Donna Battista Editor-in-Chief: Stephanie Wall Senior Acquisitions Editor: Kris Ellis-Levy Development Editor: Elisa Adams Editorial Assistant: Lauren Russell Vice President, Product Marketing: Maggie Moylan Director of Marketing, Digital Services and Products: Jeanette Koskinas Executive Field Marketing Manager: Adam Goldstein Field Marketing Manager: Lenny Ann Kucenski Product Marketing Assistant: Jessica Quazza Team Lead, Program Management: Ashley Santora Program Manager: Sarah Holle Team Lead, Project Management: Jeff Holcomb Project Manager: Kelly Warsak Operations Specialist: Carol Melville

Creative Director: Blair Brown Art Director: Janet Slowik Vice President, Director of Digital Strategy and Assessment: Paul Gentile Manager of Learning Applications: Paul DeLuca Digital Editor: Brian Surette Director, Digital Studio: Sacha Laustsen Digital Studio Manager: Diane Lombardo Digital Studio Project Manager: Monique Lawrence Digital Studio Project Manager: Alana Coles Digital Studio Project Manager: Robin Lazrus Full-Service Project Management, Composition, Interior Design, Cover Design: Integra Cover Art: Shutterstock Printer/Binder: Courier Kendallville Cover Printer: Phoenix Color/Hagerstown

Microsoft and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published as part of the services for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided “as is” without warranty of any kind. Microsoft and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all warranties and conditions of merchantability, whether express, implied or statutory, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Microsoft and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from the services.

The documents and related graphics contained herein could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Microsoft and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time. Partial screen shots may be viewed in full within the software version specified.

Microsoft® and Windows® are registered trademarks of the Microsoft Corporation in the U.S.A. and other countries. This book is not sponsored or endorsed by or affiliated with the Microsoft Corporation.

Copyright © 2017, 2015, 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved. Manufactured in the United States of America. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise. For information regarding permissions, request forms, and the appropriate contacts within the Pearson Education Global Rights and Permissions department, please visit www.pearsoned.com/permissions/.

PEARSoN, ALWAYS LEARNING, and MYMANAGEMENTLAB® are exclusive trademarks owned by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates in the U.S. and/or other countries.

Unless otherwise indicated herein, any third-party trademarks, logos, or icons that may appear in this work are the property of their respective owners, and any references to third-party trademarks, logos, icons, or other trade dress are for demonstrative or descriptive purposes only. Such references are not intended to imply any sponsorship, endorsement, authorization, or promotion of Pearson’s products by the owners of such marks, or any relationship between the owner and Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates, authors, licensees, or distributors.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Robbins, Stephen P. organizational behavior/Stephen P. Robbins, Timothy A. Judge.—17 Edition. pages cm Revised edition of organizational behavior, 2015. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-13-410398-3 1. organizational behavior. I. Judge, Tim. II. Title. HD58.7.R62 2017 658.3—dc23 2015035516

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

ISBN 10: 0-13-410398-X ISBN 13: 978-0-13-410398-3

Acknowledgments of third-party content appear on the appropriate page within the text.

v

Brief Contents

The Group

9 Foundations of Group Behavior 274 10 Understanding Work Teams 310 11 Communication 342 12 Leadership 380 13 Power and Politics 420 14 Conflict and Negotiation 456 15 Foundations of organization Structure 490

Preface xxv

Introduction

1 What Is organizational Behavior? 2

1

2

3

The Individual

2 Diversity in organizations 40 3 Attitudes and Job Satisfaction 72 4 Emotions and Moods 100 5 Personality and Values 134 6 Perception and Individual Decision Making 168 7 Motivation Concepts 206 8 Motivation: From Concepts to Applications 242

vi BrIEF COnTEnTS

The Organization System

16 organizational Culture 524 17 Human Resource Policies and Practices 560 18 organizational Change and Stress Management 602

4

Appendix Research in Organizational Behavior 644

Comprehensive Cases 651

Glossary 665 Name Index 675 Organization Index 683 Subject Index 687

vii

Contents

Preface xxv

Introduction

1 What Is Organizational Behavior? 2 The Importance of Interpersonal Skills 5

Management and Organizational Behavior 6 Management Roles 7 • Management Skills 8 • Effective versus Successful Managerial Activities 9

Complementing Intuition with Systematic Study 11 Big Data 11 Myth or Science? Management by Walking Around Is the Most Effective Management 12

Disciplines That Contribute to the OB Field 15 Psychology 15 • Social Psychology 16 • Sociology 16 • Anthropology 16

There Are Few Absolutes in OB 16

Challenges and Opportunities for OB 17 Economic Pressures 18 • Continuing Globalization 18 • Workforce Demographics 19

Personal Inventory Assessments Multicultural Awareness Scale 20 Workforce Diversity 21 • Customer Service 21 • People Skills 21 • Networked Organizations 22 • Social Media 22 • Employee Well-Being at Work 22 • Positive Work Environment 23 • Ethical Behavior 24

An Ethical Choice Vacation Deficit Disorder 25 Coming Attractions: Developing an OB Model 26 An Overview 26 • Inputs 26 • Processes 27 • Outcomes 27

Career OBjectives What do I say about my termination? 29 Summary 32

Implications for Managers 32 Point/Counterpoint The Battle of the Texts 33

Questions for review 34 Experiential Exercise Managing the oB Way 34 Ethical Dilemma There’s a Drone in Your Soup 35 Case Incident 1 Apple Goes Global 35 Case Incident 2 Big Data for Dummies 36

1

P I A

viii COnTEnTS

The Individual

2 Diversity in Organizations 40 Diversity 43 Demographic Characteristics 43 • Levels of Diversity 44

An Ethical Choice Affirmative Action for Unemployed Veterans 45 Discrimination 45

Stereotype Threat 46 Personal Inventory Assessments Intercultural Sensitivity Scale 47 Discrimination in the Workplace 47

Biographical Characteristics 48 Age 48 Myth or Science? Bald Is Better 49 Sex 50 • Race and Ethnicity 51 • Disabilities 52 • Hidden Disabilities 53

Other Differentiating Characteristics 54 Tenure 54 • Religion 54 • Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity 55

Career OBjectives Is it okay to be gay at work? 56 Cultural Identity 57

Ability 57 Intellectual Abilities 58 • Physical Abilities 59

Implementing Diversity Management Strategies 60 Attracting, Selecting, Developing, and Retaining Diverse Employees 60 • Diversity in Groups 61 • Effective Diversity Programs 62

Summary 63

Implications for Managers 63 Point/Counterpoint Affirmative Action Programs Have outlived Their Usefulness 64

Questions for review 65 Experiential Exercise Differences 65 Ethical Dilemma Getting More Women on Board 65 Case Incident 1 Walking the Walk 66 Case Incident 2 The Encore Career 67

3 Attitudes and Job Satisfaction 72 Attitudes 75

Attitudes and Behavior 76

An Ethical Choice office Talk 77 Job Attitudes 78 Job Satisfaction and Job Involvement 78 • Organizational Commitment 78 • Perceived Organizational Support 78 • Employee Engagement 79 • Are These Job Attitudes Really All That Distinct? 80

2

P I A

COnTEnTS ix

Job Satisfaction 80 Measuring Job Satisfaction 80 • How Satisfied Are People in Their Jobs? 81

What Causes Job Satisfaction? 83 Job Conditions 83 • Personality 84

Personal Inventory Assessments Core Self Evaluation (CSE) Scale 84 Pay 84 • Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) 85

Outcomes of Job Satisfaction 86 Job Performance 86 • Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) 86 • Customer Satisfaction 87 • Life Satisfaction 87

Career OBjectives How can I make my job better? 88 The Impact of Job Dissatisfaction 88 Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) 89

Myth or Science? Happy Workers Means Happy Profits 91 Managers Often “Don’t Get It” 91

Summary 92

Implications for Managers 92 Point/Counterpoint Employer–Employee Loyalty Is an outdated Concept 93

Questions for review 94 Experiential Exercise What Satisfies You about Your Dream Job? 94 Ethical Dilemma Tell-All Websites 94 Case Incident 1 The Pursuit of Happiness: Flexibility 95 Case Incident 2 Job Crafting 96

4 Emotions and Moods 100 What Are Emotions and Moods? 103 The Basic Emotions 103

Myth or Science? Smile, and the Work World Smiles with You 104 Moral Emotions 104 • The Basic Moods: Positive and Negative Affect 105 • Experiencing Moods and Emotions 106 • The Function of Emotions 107

Sources of Emotions and Moods 108 Personality 108 • Time of Day 109 • Day of the Week 109 • Weather 109 • Stress 112 • Social Activities 112 • Sleep 112 • Exercise 112 • Age 112 • Sex 113

Emotional Labor 113

Affective Events Theory 115

Emotional Intelligence 115

An Ethical Choice Should Managers Use Emotional Intelligence (EI) Tests? 117 Personal Inventory Assessments Emotional Intelligence Assessment 117 Emotion regulation 118 Emotion Regulation Influences and Outcomes 118 • Emotion Regulation Techniques 118 • Ethics of Emotion Regulation 120

P I A

P I A

x COnTEnTS

OB Applications of Emotions and Moods 121 Selection 121 • Decision Making 121 • Creativity 122 • Motivation 122 • Leadership 122 • Negotiation 123 • Customer Service 123 • Job Attitudes 123

Career OBjectives How do I turn down the volume on my screaming boss? 124 Deviant Workplace Behaviors 124 • Safety and Injury at Work 125

Summary 125

Implications for Managers 125 Point/Counterpoint Sometimes Yelling Is for Everyone’s Good 126

Questions for review 127 Experiential Exercise The Happiness Test 127 Ethical Dilemma Data Mining Emotions 127 Case Incident 1 Crybabies 128 Case Incident 2 Tall Poppy Syndrome 129

5 Personality and Values 134 Personality 137 What Is Personality? 137

Career OBjectives How do I ace the personality test? 138 Personal Inventory Assessments Personality Style Indicator 139 Personality Frameworks 139 The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator 140 • The Big Five Personality Model 140 • The Dark Triad 144

Other Personality Attributes relevant to OB 146 Core Self-Evaluations (CSEs) 146 • Self-Monitoring 147

Myth or Science? We Can Accurately Judge Individuals’ Personalities a Few Seconds after Meeting Them 148

Proactive Personality 148

Personality and Situations 149 Situation Strength Theory 149 • Trait Activation Theory 150

Values 151 The Importance and Organization of Values 151 • Terminal versus Instrumental Values 152 • Generational Values 152

An Ethical Choice Do You Have a Cheating Personality? 153 Linking an Individual’s Personality and Values to the Workplace 153 Person–Job Fit 154 • Person–Organization Fit 154 • Other Dimensions of Fit 155

Cultural Values 156 Hofstede’s Framework 156 • The GLOBE Framework 158 • Comparison of Hofstede’s Framework and the GLOBE Framework 159

Summary 159

Implications for Managers 159 Point/Counterpoint Millennials Are More Narcissistic Than Their Parents 160

P I A

COnTEnTS xi

Questions for review 161 Experiential Exercise Your Best Self 161 Ethical Dilemma Millennial Job Hopping 162 Case Incident 1 on the Costs of Being Nice 162 Case Incident 2 The Power of Quiet 163

6 Perception and Individual Decision Making 168 What Is Perception? 171

Factors That Influence Perception 171

Person Perception: Making Judgments About Others 172 Attribution Theory 173

Career OBjectives So what if I’m a few minutes late to work? 175 Common Shortcuts in Judging Others 175 • Specific Applications of Shortcuts in Organizations 177

Myth or Science? All Stereotypes Are Negative 178 The Link Between Perception and Individual Decision Making 178

Decision Making in Organizations 179 The Rational Model, Bounded Rationality, and Intuition 179 • Common Biases and Errors in Decision Making 181

Influences on Decision Making: Individual Differences and Organizational Constraints 185 Individual Differences 185 • Organizational Constraints 187

What About Ethics in Decision Making? 188 Three Ethical Decision Criteria 188 • Lying 190

An Ethical Choice Choosing to Lie 191 Creativity, Creative Decision Making, and Innovation in Organizations 191 Creative Behavior 191 • Causes of Creative Behavior 193

Personal Inventory Assessments How Creative Are You? 194 Creative Outcomes (Innovation) 195 Summary 196

Implications for Managers 196 Point/Counterpoint Stereotypes Are Dying 197

Questions for review 198 Experiential Exercise Good Liars and Bad Liars 198 Ethical Dilemma Cheating Is a Decision 198 Case Incident 1 Too Much of a Good Thing 199 Case Incident 2 The Youngest Billionaire 200

7 Motivation Concepts 206 Motivation and Early Theories 209

Early Theories of Motivation 210 Hierarchy of Needs Theory 210 • Two-Factor Theory 211 • McClelland’s Theory of Needs 212

P I A

xii COnTEnTS

Career OBjectives Why won’t he take my advice? 214 Contemporary Theories of Motivation 214 Self-Determination Theory 215

Myth or Science? Helping others and Being a Good Citizen Is Good for Your Career 216

Goal-Setting Theory 216

Other Contemporary Theories of Motivation 219 Self-Efficacy Theory 220 • Reinforcement Theory 221 An Ethical Choice Motivated by Big Brother 222 Equity Theory/Organizational Justice 224 • Expectancy Theory 229 Personal Inventory Assessments Work Motivation Indicator 230 Job Engagement 231

Integrating Contemporary Theories of Motivation 231

Summary 233

Implications for Managers 233 Point/Counterpoint Goals Get You to Where You Want to Be 234

Questions for review 235 Experiential Exercise organizational Justice Task 235 Ethical Dilemma The New GPA 235 Case Incident 1 The Demotivation of CEo Pay 236 Case Incident 2 The Sleepiness Epidemic 237

8 Motivation: From Concepts to Applications 242 Motivating by Job Design: The Job Characteristics Model 245

The Job Characteristics Model 245

Job redesign 247 Job Rotation 247

Myth or Science? Money Can’t Buy Happiness 248 Relational Job Design 248 Personal Inventory Assessments Diagnosing the Need for Team Building 250

Alternative Work Arrangements 250 Flextime 250 • Job Sharing 252 • Telecommuting 253

Career OBjectives How can I get flextime? 254 Employee Involvement and Participation 256

Examples of Employee Involvement Programs 256

Using rewards to Motivate Employees 258 What to Pay: Establishing a Pay Structure 258 • How to Pay: Rewarding Individual Employees through Variable-Pay Programs 259

An Ethical Choice Sweatshops and Worker Safety 263

Using Benefits to Motivate Employees 264 Flexible Benefits: Developing a Benefits Package 264

P I A

P I A

COnTEnTS xiii

Using Intrinsic rewards to Motivate Employees 265

Employee Recognition Programs 265

Summary 266

Implications for Managers 266 Point/Counterpoint “Face-Time” Matters 267

Questions for review 268 Experiential Exercise occupations and the Job Characteristics Model 268 Ethical Dilemma Inmates for Hire 268 Case Incident 1 Motivation for Leisure 269 Case Incident 2 Pay Raises Every Day 269

3 The Group 9 Foundations of Group Behavior 274

Defining and Classifying Groups 277 Social Identity 277 • Ingroups and Outgroups 279 • Social Identity Threat 279

Stages of Group Development 279

Group Property 1: roles 280 Role Perception 281 • Role Expectations 281 • Role Conflict 282 • Role Play and Assimilation 282

Myth or Science? Gossip and Exclusion Are Toxic for Groups 283 Group Property 2: norms 284 Norms and Emotions 284 • Norms and Conformity 284

An Ethical Choice Using Peer Pressure as an Influence Tactic 285 Norms and Behavior 286 • Positive Norms and Group Outcomes 287 • Negative Norms and Group Outcomes 287 • Norms and Culture 289

Group Property 3: Status, and Group Property 4: Size and Dynamics 289 Group Property 3: Status 289 • Group Property 4: Size and Dynamics 291

Group Property 5: Cohesiveness, and Group Property 6: Diversity 293 Group Property 5: Cohesiveness 293 • Group Property 6: Diversity 293

Personal Inventory Assessments Communicating Supportively 294 Group Decision Making 295 Groups versus the Individual 295 • Groupthink and Groupshift 296

Career OBjectives Can I fudge the numbers and not take the blame? 297 Group Decision-Making Techniques 298

Summary 299

Implications for Managers 300 Point/Counterpoint People Are More Creative When They Work Alone 301

P I A

xiv COnTEnTS

Questions for review 302 Experiential Exercise Surviving the Wild: Join a Group or Go It Alone? 302 Ethical Dilemma Is Social Loafing Unethical? 303 Case Incident 1 The Calamities of Consensus 304 Case Incident 2 Intragroup Trust and Survival 305

10 Understanding Work Teams 310 Why Have Teams Become So Popular? 313

Differences Between Groups and Teams 313

Types of Teams 314 Problem-Solving Teams 315 • Self-Managed Work Teams 315 • Cross- Functional Teams 316 • Virtual Teams 317 • Multiteam Systems 317

An Ethical Choice The Size of Your Meeting’s Carbon Footprint 318 Creating Effective Teams 319 Team Context: What Factors Determine Whether Teams Are Successful? 320 • Team Composition 321 Myth or Science? Team Members Who Are “Hot” Should Make the Play 322 Career OBjectives Is it wrong that I’d rather have guys on my team? 325 Team Processes 326 Personal Inventory Assessments Team Development Behaviors 330 Turning Individuals into Team Players 330 Selecting: Hiring Team Players 330 • Training: Creating Team Players 330 • Rewarding: Providing Incentives to Be a Good Team Player 330

Beware! Teams Aren’t Always the Answer 331

Summary 332

Implications for Managers 332 Point/Counterpoint To Get the Most out of Teams, Empower Them 333

Questions for review 334 Experiential Exercise Composing the “Perfect” Team 334 Ethical Dilemma The Sum of the Team Is Less Than Its Members 334 Case Incident 1 Tongue-Tied in Teams 336 Case Incident 2 Smart Teams and Dumb Teams 336

11 Communication 342 Functions of Communication 345

Direction of Communication 347 Downward Communication 347 • Upward Communication 347 • Lateral Communication 348 • Formal Small-Group Networks 348 • The Grapevine 349

Modes of Communication 350 Oral Communication 350

Career OBjectives Isn’t this disability too much to accommodate? 353 Written Communication 354

P I A

COnTEnTS xv

Myth or Science? Today, Writing Skills Are More Important Than Speaking Skills 357

Nonverbal Communication 358 Personal Inventory Assessments Communication Styles 359 Choice of Communication Channel 359 Channel Richness 359 • Choosing Communication Methods 360 • Information Security 362

An Ethical Choice Using Employees in organizational Social Media Strategy 363 Persuasive Communication 363 Automatic and Controlled Processing 364

Barriers to Effective Communication 365 Filtering 365 • Selective Perception 365 • Information Overload 366 • Emotions 366 • Language 366 • Silence 367 • Communication Apprehension 367 • Lying 368

Cultural Factors 368 Cultural Barriers 368 • Cultural Context 369 • A Cultural Guide 370

Summary 371

Implications for Managers 371 Point/Counterpoint We Should Use Employees’ Social Media Presence 372

Questions for review 373 Experiential Exercise An Absence of Nonverbal Communication 373 Ethical Dilemma BYoD 374 Case Incident 1 organizational Leveraging of Social Media 375 Case Incident 2 PowerPoint Purgatory 375

12 Leadership 380 Trait Theories 383

Career OBjectives How can I get my boss to be a better leader? 385 Behavioral Theories 385 Summary of Trait Theories and Behavioral Theories 386

Contingency Theories 387 The Fiedler Model 387 • Situational Leadership Theory 388 • Path–Goal Theory 389 • Leader–Participation Model 389

Contemporary Theories of Leadership 390 Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) Theory 390 • Charismatic Leadership 391 • Transactional and Transformational Leadership 394

Myth or Science? Top Leaders Feel the Most Stress 396 Personal Inventory Assessments Ethical Leadership Assessment 399 responsible Leadership 399 Authentic Leadership 399 • Ethical Leadership 400

An Ethical Choice Holding Leaders Ethically Accountable 401 Servant Leadership 402

Positive Leadership 402

P I A

P I A

xvi COnTEnTS

Trust 402 • Mentoring 405

Challenges to Our Understanding of Leadership 406 Leadership as an Attribution 406 • Substitutes for and Neutralizers of Leadership 407 • Online Leadership 408 • Selecting Leaders 408 • Training Leaders 409

Summary 410

Implications for Managers 410 Point/Counterpoint CEos Start Early 411

Questions for review 412 Experiential Exercise What Is Leadership? 412 Ethical Dilemma Smoking Success 412 Case Incident 1 Leadership Mettle Forged in Battle 413 Case Incident 2 Leadership by Algorithm 414

13 Power and Politics 420 Power and Leadership 423

Bases of Power 424 Formal Power 424 • Personal Power 424 • Which Bases of Power Are Most Effective? 425

Dependence: The Key to Power 426 The General Dependence Postulate 426 • What Creates Dependence? 426 • Social Network Analysis: A Tool for Assessing Resources 427

Power Tactics 428 Using Power Tactics 429 • Cultural Preferences for Power Tactics 430 • Applying Power Tactics 430

How Power Affects People 430 Power Variables 431 • Sexual Harassment: Unequal Power in the Workplace 432

Politics: Power in Action 433 Definition of Organizational Politics 433 • The Reality of Politics 434

Causes and Consequences of Political Behavior 435 Factors Contributing to Political Behavior 435 Career OBjectives Should I become political? 437 Myth or Science? Powerful Leaders Keep Their (Fr)Enemies Close 439 How Do People Respond to Organizational Politics? 439 • Impression Management 440

An Ethical Choice How Much Should You Manage Interviewer Impressions? 443 The Ethics of Behaving Politically 444 Personal Inventory Assessments Gaining Power and Influence 445

Mapping Your Political Career 445 Summary 446

P I A

COnTEnTS xvii

Implications for Managers 447 Point/Counterpoint Everyone Wants Power 448 Questions for review 449 Experiential Exercise Comparing Influence Tactics 449 Ethical Dilemma How Much Should You Defer to Those in Power? 449 Case Incident 1 The Powerful Take All 450 Case Incident 2 Barry’s Peer Becomes His Boss 451

14 Conf lict and Negotiation 456 A Definition of Conflict 459 Types of Conflict 459 • Loci of Conflict 461

The Conflict Process 462 Stage I: Potential Opposition or Incompatibility 462 • Stage II: Cognition and Personalization 464 • Stage III: Intentions 464 • Stage IV: Behavior 466 • Stage V: Outcomes 467

negotiation 469 Bargaining Strategies 470

Myth or Science? Teams Negotiate Better Than Individuals in Collectivistic Cultures 473

The negotiation Process 473

Individual Differences in negotiation Effectiveness 475 Career OBjectives How can I get a better job? 476 An Ethical Choice Using Empathy to Negotiate More Ethically 477 negotiating in a Social Context 480 Third-Party Negotiations 481

Summary 482

Implications for Managers 482

Personal Inventory Assessments Strategies for Handling Conflict 482

Point/Counterpoint Pro Sports Strikes Are Caused by Greedy owners 483

Questions for review 484 Experiential Exercise A Negotiation Role-Play 484 Ethical Dilemma The Lowball Applicant 485 Case Incident 1 Disorderly Conduct 485 Case Incident 2 Twinkies, Rubber Rooms, and Collective Bargaining 486

15 Foundations of Organization Structure 490 What Is Organizational Structure? 493 Work Specialization 493 • Departmentalization 495 • Chain of Command 496 • Span of Control 497 • Centralization and Decentralization 498 • Formalization 499 • Boundary Spanning 499

P I A

xviii COnTEnTS

Common Organizational Frameworks and Structures 500 The Simple Structure 500 • The Bureaucracy 501 • The Matrix Structure 503

Alternate Design Options 504 The Virtual Structure 504 • The Team Structure 505 Career OBjectives What structure should I choose? 506 An Ethical Choice Flexible Structures, Deskless Workplaces 507 The Circular Structure 507 Personal Inventory Assessments organizational Structure Assessment 507 The Leaner Organization: Downsizing 508

Why Do Structures Differ? 509 Organizational Strategies 509 • Organization Size 511 • Technology 512 • Environment 512 • Institutions 513

Organizational Designs and Employee Behavior 513

Myth or Science? Employees Can Work Just as Well from Home 514 Summary 516

Implications for Managers 516 Point/Counterpoint The End of Management 517

Questions for review 518 Experiential Exercise The Sandwich Shop 518 Ethical Dilemma Post-Millennium Tensions in the Flexible organization 519 Case Incident 1 Creative Deviance: Bucking the Hierarchy? 519 Case Incident 2 Boeing Dreamliner: Engineering Nightmare or organizational Disaster? 520

The Organization System

16 Organizational Culture 524 What Is Organizational Culture? 527 A Definition of Organizational Culture 527 • Culture Is a Descriptive Term 527 • Do Organizations Have Uniform Cultures? 528

Myth or Science? An organization’s Culture Is Forever 529 Strong versus Weak Cultures 529 • Culture versus Formalization 530

What Do Cultures Do? 530 The Functions of Culture 530 • Culture Creates Climate 530 • The Ethical Dimension of Culture 531 • Culture and Sustainability 532 • Culture and Innovation 533 • Culture as an Asset 534 • Culture as a Liability 535

Creating and Sustaining Culture 537 How a Culture Begins 537 • Keeping a Culture Alive 537 • Summary: How Organizational Cultures Form 541

4

P I A

COnTEnTS xix

How Employees Learn Culture 541 Stories 541 • Rituals 541 • Symbols 542

An Ethical Choice A Culture of Compassion 543 Language 543

Influencing an Organizational Culture 544 An Ethical Culture 544 • A Positive Culture 544 • A Spiritual Culture 547

Career OBjectives How do I learn to lead? 549 The Global Context 549

Summary 551

Implications for Managers 551

Personal Inventory Assessments Comfort with Change Scale 551

Point/Counterpoint organizations Should Strive to Create a Positive organizational Culture 552

Questions for review 553 Experiential Exercise Greeting Newcomers 553 Ethical Dilemma Culture of Deceit 554 Case Incident 1 The Place Makes the People 555 Case Incident 2 Active Cultures 556

17 Human Resource Policies and Practices 560 recruitment Practices 563

Selection Practices 563 How the Selection Process Works 563 • Initial Selection 564

Substantive and Contingent Selection 566 Written Tests 566 • Performance-Simulation Tests 568 • Interviews 569 • Contingent Selection Tests 571

Training and Development Programs 571 Types of Training 571 • Training Methods 574 • Evaluating Effectiveness 575

Performance Evaluation 575 What Is Performance? 575 • Purposes of Performance Evaluation 576 • What Do We Evaluate? 576 • Who Should Do the Evaluating? 577 • Methods of Performance Evaluation 578 • Improving Performance Evaluations 579 • Providing Performance Feedback 581 Career OBjectives How do I fire someone? 582 International Variations in Performance Appraisal 583

The Leadership role of Hr 583 Communicating HR Practices 584 • Designing and Administering Benefit Programs 585 • Drafting and Enforcing Employment Policies 585

An Ethical Choice HIV/AIDS and the Multinational organization 586 Managing Work–Life Conflicts 587

Myth or Science? The 24-Hour Workplace Is Harmful 587

P I A

xx COnTEnTS

Mediations, Terminations, and Layoffs 588

Summary 590

Implications for Managers 590

Personal Inventory Assessments Positive Practices Survey 591

Point/Counterpoint Employers Should Check Applicant Criminal Backgrounds 592

Questions for review 593 Experiential Exercise Designing an Effective Structured Job Interview 593 Ethical Dilemma Are on-Demand Workers Really Employees? 594 Case Incident 1 Getting a Foot in the Door 595 Case Incident 2 You May Be Supporting Slavery 595

18 Organizational Change and Stress Management 602 Change 605 Forces for Change 605 • Planned Change 606

resistance to Change 607 Overcoming Resistance to Change 609 • The Politics of Change 611

Approaches to Managing Organizational Change 611 Lewin’s Three-Step Model 611 • Kotter’s Eight-Step Plan 612 • Action Research 613 • Organizational Development 613

Creating a Culture for Change 616 Managing Paradox 617 • Stimulating a Culture of Innovation 617 Creating a Learning Organization 619 • Organizational Change and Stress 620

Stress at Work 621 What Is Stress? 621 • Potential Sources of Stress at Work 623

Career OBjectives How can I bring my team’s overall stress level down? 625 Individual Differences 626 • Cultural Differences 627

Consequences of Stress at Work 628 Myth or Science? When You’re Working Hard, Sleep Is optional 629 Managing Stress 630 Individual Approaches 630 • Organizational Approaches 631

An Ethical Choice Manager and Employee Stress during organizational Change 632 Summary 634

Implications for Managers 634

Personal Inventory Assessments Tolerance of Ambiguity Scale 634

Point/Counterpoint Companies Should Encourage Stress Reduction 635

Questions for review 636 Experiential Exercise Mindfulness at Work 636 Ethical Dilemma All Present and Accounted For 637 Case Incident 1 Sprucing Up Walmart 638 Case Incident 2 When Companies Fail to Change 639

P I A

P I A

COnTEnTS xxi

Appendix Research in Organizational Behavior 644

Comprehensive Cases 651

Glossary 665 Name Index 675 Organization Index 683 Subject Index 687

This page intentionally left blank

xxiii

About the Authors

Stephen P. Robbins Education Ph.D., University of Arizona

Professional Experience Academic Positions: Professor, San Diego State University, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, University of Baltimore, Concordia University in Montreal, and University of Nebraska at Omaha.

Research: Research interests have focused on conflict, power, and politics in organizations; behavioral decision making; and the development of effective interpersonal skills.

Books Published: World’s best-selling author of textbooks in both management and organizational behavior. His books have sold more than 5 million copies and have been translated into 20 languages; editions have been adapted for Canada, Australia, South Africa, and India, such as these:

●● Essentials of Organizational Behavior, 12th ed. (Prentice Hall, 2014) ●● Management, 12th ed. with Mary Coulter (Prentice Hall, 2014) ●● Fundamentals of Human Resource Management, 10th ed., with David DeCenzo

(Wiley, 2010) ●● Prentice Hall’s Self-Assessment Library 3.4 (Prentice Hall, 2010) ●● Fundamentals of Management, 8th ed., with David DeCenzo and Mary

Coulter (Prentice Hall, 2013) ●● Supervision Today! 7th ed., with David DeCenzo and Robert Wolter

(Prentice Hall, 2013) ●● Training in Interpersonal Skills: TIPS for Managing People at Work, 6th ed.,

with Phillip Hunsaker (Prentice Hall, 2012) ●● Managing Today! 2nd ed. (Prentice Hall, 2000) ●● Organization Theory, 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, 1990) ●● The Truth About Managing People, 2nd ed. (Financial Times/Prentice Hall,

2008) ●● Decide and Conquer: Make Winning Decisions and Take Control of Your Life

(Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2004).

Other Interests In his “other life,” Dr. Robbins actively participates in masters’ track competi- tion. After turning 50 in 1993, he won 18 national championships and 12 world titles. He is the current world record holder at 100 meters (12.37 seconds) and 200 meters (25.20 seconds) for men 65 and over.

xxiv ABOUT THE AUTHOrS

Timothy A. Judge

Education Ph.D., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Professional Experience Academic Positions: Associate Dean for Faculty and Research, University of Notre Dame; Franklin D. Schurz Chair, Department of Management, Mendoza College of Business, University of Notre Dame; Concurrent Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame; Visiting Distinguished Adjunct Professor of King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia; Visiting Professor, Division of Psychology & Language Sciences, University College London; Matherly- McKethan Eminent Scholar in Management, Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida; Stanley M. Howe Professor in Leadership, Henry B. Tippie College of Business, University of Iowa; Associate Professor (with tenure), Depart- ment of Human Resource Studies, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University; Lecturer, Charles University, Czech Republic, and Comenius University, Slovakia; Instructor, Industrial/Organizational Psychology, Depart- ment of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Research: Dr. Judge’s primary research interests are in (1) personality, moods, and emotions; (2) job attitudes; (3) leadership and influence behaviors; and (4) careers (person–organization fit, career success). Dr. Judge has published more than 154 articles on these and other major topics in journals such as Jour- nal of Organizational Behavior, Personnel Psychology, Academy of Management Jour- nal, Journal of Applied Psychology, European Journal of Personality, and European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. He serves as Director of Research for Stay Metrics Corporation, linking his research with application in the truck- ing industry.

Fellowship: Dr. Judge is a fellow of the American Psychological Association, the Academy of Management, the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, and the American Psychological Society.

Awards: In 1995, Dr. Judge received the Ernest J. McCormick Award for Distinguished Early Career Contributions from the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. In 2001, he received the Larry L. Cum- mings Award for mid-career contributions from the Organizational Behavior Division of the Academy of Management. In 2007, he received the Profes- sional Practice Award from the Institute of Industrial and Labor Relations, University of Illinois. In 2008, he received the University of Florida Doctoral Mentoring Award. And in 2012, he received the Editorial Board of the Euro- pean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (EJWOP) best paper of the year award.

Other Books Published: H. G. Heneman III, T. A. Judge, and J. D. Kammeyer- Mueller, Staffing Organizations, 8th ed. (Mishawaka, IN: Pangloss Industries, 2015).

Other Interests Although he cannot keep up (literally!) with Dr. Robbins’ accomplishments on the track, Dr. Judge enjoys golf, cooking and baking, literature (he’s a particular fan of Thomas Hardy and is a member of the Thomas Hardy Society), and keep- ing up with his three children, who range in age from adult to middle school.

xxv

Preface

Welcome to the seventeenth edition of Organizational Behavior! Long con- sidered the standard for all organizational behavior textbooks, this edition continues its tradition of making current, relevant topics come alive for students. While maintaining its hallmark features—engaging writing style, cutting-edge content, and intuitive pedagogy—this edition has been significantly updated to reflect the most recent research and current business events within the field of organizational behavior worldwide. The seven- teenth edition is one of the most contemporary revisions of Organizational Behavior we’ve undertaken, and while we’ve preserved the core relevant material, we’re confident that this edition reflects the most important issues facing organizations, managers, and employees today with a balanced, dis- cerning approach.

Key Changes to the Seventeenth Edition ●● NEW Feature in every chapter! Career OBjectives in advice, question-and-

answer format to help students think through issues they may face in the workforce today.

●● NEW Opening Vignette in every chapter to bring current business trends and events to the forefront.

●● NEW key terms presented in bold throughout the text (up to three new per chapter) highlight new vocabulary pertinent to today’s study of organiza- tional behavior.

●● NEW photos and captions in every chapter link the chapter content to contemporary real-life worldwide situations to enhance the student’s under- standing of hands-on application of concepts.

●● NEW These feature topics are either completely new or substantially updated within each chapter as applicable to reflect ongoing challenges in business worldwide and focus the student’s attention on new topics:

●● Learning Objectives (in 15 chapters) ●● Exhibits (15 throughout the text) ●● Myth or Science? (8 of 18 total) ●● An Ethical Choice (10 of 18 total) ●● Point/Counterpoint (8 of 18 total)

●● NEW The following end-of-chapter material is either completely new or substantially revised and updated for each chapter to bring the most con- temporary thinking to the attention of students:

●● Summary (4 of 18 total) ●● Implications for Managers (11 of 18 total) ●● Questions for Review (in 16 chapters) ●● Experiential Exercise (12 of 18 total) ●● Ethical Dilemma (14 of 18 total) ●● Case Incidents (25 of 36 total)

MyManagementLab Suggested Activities For the 17th edition the author is excited that Pearson’s MyManagementLab has been integrated fully into the text. These new features are outlined below.

xxvi PrEFACE

Making assessment activities available on line for students to complete before coming to class will allow you the professor more discussion time during the class to review areas that students are having difficulty in comprehending.

Learn It Students can be assigned the Chapter Warm-Up before coming to class. Assign- ing these questions ahead of time will ensure that students are coming to class prepared.

Personal Inventory Assessments (PIA) Students learn better when they can connect what they’re learning to their per- sonal experience. PIA (Personal Inventory Assessments) is a collection of online exercises designed to promote self-reflection and student engagement, enhanc- ing their ability to connect with concepts taught in principles of management, organizational behavior, and human resource management classes. Assessments are assignable by instructors who can then track students completions. Student results include a written explanation along with a graphic display that shows how their results compare to the class as a whole. Instructors will also have access to this graphic representation of results to promote classroom discussion.

Watch It! Recommends a video clip that can be assigned to students for outside class- room viewing or that can be watched in the classroom. The video corresponds to the chapter material and is accompanied by multiple choice questions that re-enforce the student’s comprehension of the chapter content.

Try It! Recommends a mini simulation that can be assigned to students as an outside classroom activity or it can be done in the classroom. As the students watch the simulation, they will be asked to make choices based on the scenario presented in the simulation. At the end of the simulation, the student will receive immedi- ate feedback based on the answers they gave. These simulations re-enforce the concepts of the chapter and the students, comprehension of those concepts.

Talk About It These are discussion questions that can be assigned as an activity within the classroom.

Assisted Graded Writing Questions These are short essay questions that the students can complete as an assignment and submit to you the professor for grading.

Chapter Quiz These are review questions that can be assigned to students to answer upon completion of the chapter, this gradeable activity allows you the professor to see if the students have comprehended the chapter’s content.

Chapter-by-Chapter Changes Chapter 1: What Is Organizational Behavior?

●● New Opening Vignette (Wall Street Warriors) ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: What Is Management?)

PrEFACE xxvii

●● New research in The Importance of Interpersonal Skills ●● New Feature! Watch It (Herman Miller: Organizational Behavior) ●● Newly revised section: Management and Organizational Behavior ●● Updated Myth or Science? (Management by Walking Around Is the Most

Effective Management) ●● New research in Big Data ●● New section: Current Usage ●● New section: New Trends ●● New section: Limitations ●● New research in Overseeing Movement of Jobs to Countries with Low-Cost

Labor ●● New research in Adapting to Differing Cultural and Regulatory Norms ●● New major section: Workforce Demographics ●● New research in Customer Service ●● New major section: Social Media ●● New research in Positive Work Environment ●● New research in Ethical Behavior ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (What do I say about my termination?) ●● Updated OB Poll (Percentage of Men and Women Working) ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Multicultural Awareness Scale) ●● New section in Withdrawal Behavior ●● New international research in Productivity ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Point/Counterpoint (The Battle of the Texts) ●● New Experiential Exercise (Managing the OB Way) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (There’s a Drone in Your Soup) ●● Updated Case Incident 1 (Apple Goes Global) ●● New Case Incident 2 (Big Data for Dummies)

Chapter 2: Diversity in Organizations ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Exploiting a Loophole) ●● Revised section: Demographic Characteristics ●● Updated OB Poll (Gender Pay Gap: Narrowing but Still There) ●● Updated An Ethical Choice (Affirmative Action for Unemployed Veterans) ●● New major section: Stereotype Threat ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Intercultural Sensitivity Scale) ●● New research in Discrimination in the Workplace ●● Updated Myth or Science? (Bald Is Better) ●● New research and section in Age ●● New international research in Sex ●● New international research in Race and Ethnicity ●● New international research in Disabilities ●● New major section: Hidden Disabilities ●● New international research in Religion ●● New international research in Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (Is it okay to be gay at work?) ●● New Feature! Watch It (Verizon: Diversity) ●● New research in Intellectual Abilities ●● Major new section: Hidden Disabilities ●● New international research in Physical Abilities ●● New research in Diversity in Groups ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Human Resources and Diversity) ●● Updated Implications for Managers

xxviii PrEFACE

●● New/updated Point/Counterpoint (Affirmative Action Programs Have Outlived Their Usefulness)

●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (Differences) ●● New/updated Ethical Dilemma (Getting More Women on Board) ●● New Case Incident 1 (Walking the Walk) ●● New/updated Case Incident 2 (The Encore Career)

Chapter 3: Attitudes and Job Satisfaction ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Patching Together a Career) ●● New Feature! Watch It (Gawker Media: Attitudes and Job Satisfaction) ●● New An Ethical Choice (Office Talk) ●● New Exhibit 3-2 (Worst Jobs of 2014 for Job Satisfaction) ●● New research in How Satisfied Are People in Their Jobs? ●● New section: Job Conditions ●● New section: Personality ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Core Self-Evaluation [CSE]

Scale) ●● New Exhibit 3-5 (Relationship Between Average Pay in Job and Job Satisfac-

tion of Employees in That Job) ●● New major section: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) ●● New research in Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) ●● New section: Life Satisfaction ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How can I make my job better?) ●● New major section: Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New/updated Point/Counterpoint (Employer-Employee Loyalty Is an Outdated

Concept) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (What Satisfies You about Your Dream Job?) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (Tell-All Websites) ●● Updated Case Incident 1 (The Pursuit of Happiness: Flexibility) ●● Updated Case Incident 2 (Job Crafting)

Chapter 4: Emotions and Moods ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Blowing Up) ●● New international research in The Basic Emotions ●● Updated Myth or Science? (Smile, and the Work World Smiles with You) ●● New research and discussion in Moral Emotions ●● Updated Exhibit 4-2 (The Structure of Mood) ●● New international research in Experiencing Moods and Emotions ●● New research in The Functions of Emotions ●● New research in Do Emotions Make Us Ethical? ●● New research in Time of the Day ●● New research and discussion in Sleep ●● New research and discussion in Emotional Labor ●● New research and discussion in Emotional Intelligence ●● Updated An Ethical Choice (Should Managers Use Emotional Intelligence

[EI] Tests?) ●● New section in Emotion Regulation Influences and Outcomes ●● New section in Emotion Regulation Techniques ●● New section: Ethics of Emotion Regulation

PrEFACE xxix

●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How do I turn down the volume on my screaming boss?)

●● New research in Safety and Injury at Work ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Feature! Emotional Intelligence Assessment ●● Updated Point/Counterpoint (Sometimes Yelling Is for Everyone’s Good) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (The Happiness Test) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (Data Mining Emotions) ●● Updated Case Incident 1 (Crybabies) ●● New Case Incident 2 (Tall Poppy Syndrome)

Chapter 5: Personality and Values ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Secrets of a Successful Entrepreneur) ●● New research in What is Personality? ●● New international research and discussion in Measuring Personality ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How do I ace the personality test?) ●● New introduction in Personality Frameworks ●● New section in The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ●● New research and discussion in The Big Five Personality Model ●● New sections: Conscientiousness at Work, Emotional Stability at Work,

Extraversion at Work, Openness at Work, and Agreeableness at Work ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Individual Behavior) ●● New research in The Dark Triad ●● New major section: Other Traits ●● New/updated Myth or Science? (We Can Accurately Judge Individuals’

Personalities a Few Seconds After Meeting Them) ●● New research and discussion in Proactive Personality ●● New research and discussion in Situation Strength Theory ●● New Feature! Watch It (Honest Tea: Ethics—Company Mission and

Values) ●● Updated An Ethical Choice (Do You Have a Cheating Personality?) ●● New international research in Person-Job Fit ●● New research and discussion in Person-Organization Fit ●● New major section: Other Dimensions of Fit ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Human Behavior) ●● New discussion in Cultural Values ●● Revised Summary ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Feature! Personality Inventory Assessment (Personality Style Indicator) ●● New/updated Point/Counterpoint (Millennials Are More Narcissistic Than

Their Parents) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (Your Best Self) ●● Revised/updated Ethical Dilemma (Millennial Job Hopping) ●● Updated Case Incident 2 (The Power of Quiet)

Chapter 6: Perception and Individual Decision Making ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Is Palmer Luckey Lucky or Masterfully Creative?) ●● New research and discussion in Perceiver ●● New research and discussion in Target ●● New research and discussion in Context

xxx PrEFACE

●● New Feature! Watch It (Orpheus Group Casting: Social Perception and Attribution)

●● New discussion and research in Person Perception: Making Judgments about Others

●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (So what if I’m a few minutes late to work?) ●● New research in Attribution Theory ●● Updated discussion in Halo Effect ●● New research and discussion in The Link Between Perception and Individual

Decision Making ●● New research in Escalation of Commitment ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Decision Making) ●● New research in Gender ●● New section: Nudging ●● New international research and discussion in Three Ethical Decision Criteria ●● New major section: Lying ●● New research in Creative Behavior ●● New sections created with new research and discussion: Intelligence and Cre-

ativity, Personality and Creativity, Expertise and Creativity, Ethics and Creativity ●● New section in Creative Environment ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (How Creative Are You?) ●● Revised Point-Counterpoint (Stereotypes Are Dying) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (Good Liars and Bad Liars) ●● New/updated Ethical Dilemma (Cheating Is a Decision) ●● New Case Incident 1 (Too Much of a Good Thing)

Chapter 7: Motivation Concepts ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Motivated Toward Corporate Social Responsibility) ●● New Feature! Watch It (Motivation [TWZ Role Play]) ●● New research and discussion in Hierarchy of Needs Theory ●● Updated Exhibit 7-1 (Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs) ●● New international research and discussion in McClelland’s Theory of Needs ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (Why won’t he take my advice?) ●● New research and discussion in Self-Determination Theory ●● New international research, discussion, and organization in Goal-Setting

Theory ●● New section: Goal-Setting and Ethics ●● New research in Self-Efficacy Theory ●● Updated An Ethical Choice (Motivated by Big Brother) ●● New research and organization in Equity Theory/Organizational Justice ●● New section: Ensuring Justice ●● New section with international research and discussion: Culture and Justice ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Motivation) ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Work Motivation Indicator) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Ethical Dilemma (The New GPA) ●● New Case Incident 1 (The Demotivation of CEO Pay) ●● New Case Incident 2 (The Sleepiness Epidemic)

Chapter 8: Motivation: From Concepts to Applications ●● New Opening Vignette (Motivated to Risk It All) ●● Updated Exhibit 8-1 (The Job Characteristics Model)

PrEFACE xxxi

●● New section, international research, and discussion in The Job Character- istics Model

●● New research and discussion in Job Rotation ●● New/updated Myth or Science? (Money Can’t Buy Happiness) ●● New section and research in Relational Job Design ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Need for Team Building) ●● New research in Flextime ●● New research in Job Sharing ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How can I get flextime?) ●● New research and discussion in Telecommuting ●● New international research and discussion in Employee Involvement and

Participation ●● New research in Participative Management ●● New research in Representative Participation ●● New section, research, and discussion in How to Pay: Rewarding Individual

Employees Through Variable-Pay Programs ●● New section, international research, and discussion in Piece-Rate Pay ●● New research in Merit-Based Pay ●● New international research in Bonuses ●● New international research in Profit-Sharing Plans ●● New research in Employee Stock Ownership Plans ●● New/updated section: Evaluation of Variable Pay ●● Updated An Ethical Choice (Sweatshops and Worker Safety) ●● New section and international research in Flexible Benefits: Developing

a Benefits Package ●● New research in Employee Recognition Programs ●● New Feature! Watch It (Zappos: Motivating Employees Through Company

Culture) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Case Incident 2 (Pay Raises Every Day)

Chapter 9: Foundations of Group Behavior ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Crushed by the Herd) ●● New major section: Social Identity ●● New section: Ingroups and Outgroups ●● New section: Social Identity Threat ●● New Feature! Watch It (Witness.org: Managing Groups & Teams) ●● New section: Role Perception ●● New section: Role Expectations ●● New section: Role Conflict ●● New section: Role Play and Assimilation ●● New Myth or Science? (Gossip and Exclusion Are Toxic for Groups) ●● New research in Group Property 2: Norms ●● New section: Norms and Emotions ●● New research in Norms and Conformity ●● Updated An Ethical Choice ●● New section: Norms and Behavior ●● New major section: Positive Norms and Group Outcomes ●● New section: Negative Norms and Group Outcomes ●● New section: Norms and Culture ●● New introduction in new section: Group Property 3: Status and Group

Property 4: Size and Dynamics ●● New research in Status and Norms

xxxii PrEFACE

●● New research in Status and Group Interaction ●● New section: Group Status ●● New research in Group Property 4: Size and Dynamics ●● New introduction in Group Property 5: Cohesiveness and Group Property

6: Diversity ●● New international research in Group Property 6: Diversity ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Communicating Supportively) ●● New international research in Effectiveness and Efficiency ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (Can I fudge the numbers and not take the

blame?) ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Case Incident 2 (Intragroup Trust and Survival)

Chapter 10: Understanding Work Teams ●● New Opening Vignette (Teams That Play Together Stay Together) ●● New research and discussion in Why Have Teams Become So Popular? ●● New discussion in Problem-Solving Teams ●● New research in Cross-Functional Teams ●● New research in Virtual Teams ●● New research and discussion in Multiteam Systems ●● New Feature! Watch It (Teams [TWZ Role Play]) ●● New research and discussion in Creating Effective Teams ●● Revised Exhibit 10-3 (Team Effectiveness Model) ●● New international research in Climate of Trust ●● New research in Team Composition ●● New research and discussion in Personality of Members ●● New section: Cultural Differences ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (Is it wrong that I’d rather have guys on my

team?) ●● New research in Size of Teams ●● New major section: Team Identity ●● New major section: Team Cohesion ●● New international research and discussion in Mental Models ●● New international research and discussion in Conflict Levels ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Team Development Behaviors) ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Teams) ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Ethical Dilemma (The Sum of the Team Is Less Than Its Members) ●● Updated Case Incident 1 (Tongue-Tied in Teams) ●● New Case Incident 2 (Smart Teams and Dumb Teams)

Chapter 11: Communication ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Curious Communication) ●● New research and discussion in Functions of Communication ●● New research in Downward Communication ●● New section in Upward Communication ●● New research and discussion in The Grapevine ●● New Feature! Watch It (Communication [TWZ Role Play]) ●● New Exhibit 11-4 (Dealing with Gossip and Rumors) ●● New section in Oral Communication ●● Major new section in Meetings ●● Major new section in Videoconferencing and Conference Calling

PrEFACE xxxiii

●● Major new section in Telephone ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (Isn’t this too much to accommodate?) ●● New research in Letters ●● New major section in E-mail ●● New research in Social Media Websites ●● New section: Apps ●● New research in Blogs ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Communication Styles) ●● Updated Exhibit 11-7 (Information Richness and Communication Channels) ●● New research in Choosing Communication Methods ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Communication) ●● New research in Information Overload ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Ethical Dilemma (BYOD) ●● Updated Case Incident 1 (Organizational Leveraging of Social Media)

Chapter 12: Leadership ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (The Flamboyant Leadership of Jack Ma) ●● New Feature! Watch It (Leadership [TWZ Role Play]) ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How can I get my boss to be a better

leader?) ●● New international research in Trait Theories ●● New introduction in Contemporary Theories of Leadership ●● New research in Leader-Member Exchange Theory ●● New research in What Is Charismatic Leadership? ●● New research in Transactional and Transformational Leadership ●● New research in How Transformational Leadership Works ●● New international research in Evaluation of Transformational Leadership ●● New section Transformational versus Charismatic Leadership ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Ethical Leadership Assessment) ●● New introduction in Responsible Leadership ●● New research in Servant Leadership ●● New section: Trust and Culture ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Leadership) ●● Revised Summary ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Questions for Review ●● New Point-Counterpoint (CEOs Start Early) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (Smoking Success)

Chapter 13: Power and Politics ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Power in College Sports) ●● New Feature! Watch It (Power and Political Behavior) ●● New Learning Objectives and Questions ●● New discussion in Power and Leadership ●● Major new section: Social Network Analysis: A Tool for Assessing Resources ●● New Exhibit 13-1 (Sociogram) ●● New international research and discussion in Sexual Harassment ●● New research and discussion in Individual Factors ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (Should I become political?) ●● New research and discussion in Organizational Factors ●● New research in Impression Management

xxxiv PrEFACE

●● New An Ethical Choice (How Much Should You Manage Interviewer Impressions?)

●● New section: Interviews and IM ●● New section: Performance Evaluations and IM ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Gaining Power and Influence) ●● Updated Point/Counterpoint (Everyone Wants Power) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (Comparing Influence Tactics) ●● New Case Incident 1 (The Powerful Take All) ●● Updated Case Incident 2 (Barry’s Peer Becomes His Boss)

Chapter 14: Conflict and Negotiation ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (A Change of Tune) ●● New discussion and organization in A Definition of Conflict ●● New international research in Personal Variables ●● New research and discussion in Stage IV: Behavior ●● New research in Functional Outcomes ●● New Feature! Watch It (Gordon Law Group: Conflict and Negotiation) ●● New international research and discussion in Managing Functional

Conflict ●● New research in Preparation and Planning ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How can I get a better job?) ●● New research and discussion in Personality Traits in Negotiations ●● New research and discussion in Gender Differences in Negotiations ●● New major section: Negotiating in a Social Context ●● New research in Third-Party Negotiations ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Strategies for Handling Conflict) ●● Updated Point-Counterpoint (Pro Sports Strikes Are Caused by Greedy

Owners) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (A Negotiation Role-Play) ●● New Case Incident 1 (Disorderly Conduct) ●● Updated Case Incident 2 (Twinkies, Rubber Rooms, and Collective Bargaining)

Chapter 15: Foundations of Organization Structure ●● New Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (In the Flat Field) ●● Revised Exhibit 15-1 (Key Design Questions and Answers for Designing the

Proper Organizational Structure) ●● New section in Departmentalization ●● New major section: Boundary Spanning ●● New major section: The Functional Structure ●● New major section: The Divisional Structure ●● New design and discussion in Alternate Design Options ●● New section: The Team Structure ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (What structure should I choose?) ●● New section: The Circular Structure ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Organizational Structure

Assessment) ●● New research in The Leaner Organization: Downsizing ●● New research in Organizational Strategies ●● New international research in Technology

PrEFACE xxxv

●● New major section: Institutions ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Organizational Structure) ●● New Feature! Watch It (ZipCar: Organizational Structure) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Ethical Dilemma (Post-Millennium Tensions in the Flexible Organization) ●● New Experiential Exercise (The Sandwich Shop)

Chapter 16: Organizational Culture ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Welcome to the Machine) ●● New discussion on What Is Organizational Culture? ●● New major section: Culture and Sustainability ●● Updated research in Culture and Innovation ●● New section: Strengthening Dysfunctions ●● New section in Barriers to Acquisitions and Mergers ●● New research in Socialization ●● Revised An Ethical Choice ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Organizational Culture) ●● New section introduction: Influencing an Organizational Culture ●● New section topic: A Positive Culture ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How do I learn to lead?) ●● New section topic: The Global Context ●● New international research in The Global Context ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Comfort with Change Scale) ●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (Greeting Newcomers) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (Culture of Deceit) ●● New Case Incident 1 (The Place Makes the People) ●● New Case Incident 2 (Active Cultures)

Chapter 17: Human Resource Policies and Practices ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Would You Like a Diploma with Your Latté?) ●● Revised Exhibit 17-1 (Model of Selection Process in Organizations) ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How do I fire someone?) ●● New research and discussion in Recruitment Practices ●● New research in Written Tests ●● New research and discussion in Interviews ●● New research and discussion in Civility Training ●● New international research and discussion in Evaluating Effectiveness ●● New Exhibit 17-2 (360-Degree Evaluations) ●● New research in Providing Performance Feedback ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: HR) ●● New major section: Communicating HR Practices ●● New research in Designing and Administering Benefit Programs ●● Updated An Ethical Choice (HIV/AIDS and the Multinational Organization) ●● New research in Drafting and Enforcing Employment Policies ●● New Myth or Science? (The 24-Hour Workplace Is Harmful) ●● New research in Managing Work–Life Conflicts ●● Revised/updated Exhibit 17-4 (Work–Life Initiatives) ●● New Feature! Watch It (Patagonia: Human Resource Management) ●● New Summary ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Positive Practices Survey)

xxxvi PrEFACE

●● New Point/Counterpoint (Employers Should Check Applicant Criminal Backgrounds)

●● Revised Questions for Review ●● New Experiential Exercise (Designing an Effective Structured Job Interview) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (Are On-Demand Workers Really Employees?) ●● New Case Incident 1 (Getting a Foot in the Door?)

Chapter 18: Organizational Change and Stress Management ●● Revised Learning Objectives ●● New Opening Vignette (Supporting Change from the Bottom Up) ●● New research in Change ●● New discussion in Forces for Change ●● New research and discussion in Planned Change ●● New research in Resistance to Change ●● New research in Develop Positive Relationships ●● New discussion in Coercion ●● New Feature! Try It (Simulation: Change) ●● New major section: Managing Paradox ●● New research in Stimulating a Culture of Innovation ●● New international research in Sources of Innovation ●● New research in Creating a Learning Organization ●● New Feature! Watch It (East Haven Fire Department: Managing Stress) ●● Updated Exhibit 18-7 (Work Is the Biggest Stress for Most ●● Updated OB Poll (Many Employees Feel Extreme Stress) ●● New research and section in What Is Stress? ●● Revised/Updated Exhibit 18-8 (A Model of Stress) ●● New Feature! Career OBjectives (How can I bring my team’s overall stress level

down?) ●● New research in Organizational Factors ●● New research in Personal Factors ●● Updated Myth or Science? (When You’re Working Hard, Sleep Is Optional) ●● New research in Behavioral Symptoms ●● New research in Organizational Approaches ●● Revised Summary ●● Revised Implications for Managers ●● New Feature! Personal Inventory Assessment (Tolerance of Ambiguity Scale) ●● New Point/Counterpoint (Companies Should Encourage Stress Reduction) ●● New Experiential Exercise (Mindfulness at Work) ●● New Ethical Dilemma (All Present and Accounted For) ●● New Case Incident 1 (Sprucing Up Walmart)

Instructor Resources At the Instructor Resource Center, www.pearsonhighered.com/irc, instructors can easily register to gain access to a variety of instructor resources available with  this text in downloadable format. If assistance is needed, our dedicated technical support team is ready to help with the media supplements that accom- pany this text. Visit http://247.pearsoned.com for answers to frequently asked questions and toll-free user support phone numbers.

The following supplements are available with this text:

●● Instructor’s Resource Manual ●● Test Bank ●● TestGen® Computerized Test Bank ●● PowerPoint Presentation

xxxvii

Acknowledgments

Getting this book into your hands was a team effort. It took faculty reviewers and a talented group of designers and production specialists, editorial personnel, and marketing and sales staff.

The seventeenth edition was peer reviewed by many experts in the field. Their comments, compliments, and suggestions have significantly improved the final product. The authors would also like to extend their sincerest thanks to the following instructors: Pam DeLotell, Kaplan University; Phil Roth, Clemson University; Jody Tolan, MBA, Lecturer, Management and Organiza- tion, University of Southern California Marshall School of Business; Holly A. Schroth, University of California, Berkeley; Jon C. Tomlinson, Ph.D., Univer- sity of Northwestern Ohio; Andrew Johnson, Santa Clara University; Dr. Alan Goldman, Professor of Management, Faculty Director, W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University West; Dr. Edward F. Lisoski, Angelo State University; E. Anne Christo-Baker, Purdue University North Central; and Dr. Josh Plaskoff, Kelley School of Business—IUPUI.

The authors wish to thank Lori Ehrman Tinkey of the University of Notre Dame and John Kammeyer-Mueller of the University of Minnesota for help with several key aspects of this revision.

We owe a debt of gratitude to all those at Pearson Education who have supported this text over the past 30 years and who have worked so hard on the development of this latest edition. On the development and editorial side, we want to thank Kris Ellis-Levy, Senior Acquisitions Editor; Ashley Santora, Program Manager Team Lead; Sarah Holle, Program Manager; and Elisa Adams, Development Editor. On the design and production side, Jeff Holcomb, Proj- ect Manager Team Lead, did an outstanding job, as did Kelly Warsak, Project Manager, and Nancy Moudry, Photo Development Editor. Last but not least, we would like to thank Lenny Ann Kucenski, Marketing Manager; Maggie Moylan, Director of Marketing; and their sales staff, who have been selling this text over its many editions. Thank you for the attention you’ve given to this text.

S ou

rc e:

C hr

is G

oo dn

ey /B

lo om

be rg

/G et

ty Im

ag es

What Is Organizational Behavior?1

2

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 3

Wall Street WarriorS

Brad Katsuyama had never set foot on Wall Street until his employer, the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), sent him to New York from Toronto. At 23 years old, he felt unprepared to help put RBC “on the map” of

Wall Street investors and had a difficult time applying RBC’s

slogan of friendliness—“RBC nice”—to the new environment. Remarking on his early experience, Katsuyama said, “I met

more offensive people in a year than I had in my entire life.”

Stock trading is done electronically, so at first Katsuyama

could surround himself with fellow RBC employees in his own

offices and thus avoid the harsh Wall Street personalities.

That all changed in 2006, when RBC acquired U.S. electronic-

trading firm Carlin Financial, and Katsuyama was required to

work with them. Carlin’s culture was the extreme opposite of

RBC nice. Its CEO, Jeremy Frommer, summed it up when he

said, “It’s not just enough to fly in first class; I have to know

my friends are flying in coach.” Worse than the culture clash between RBC and Carlin was

the shocking lack of technical acumen in both companies.

RBC didn’t know much about electronic trading, and Katsuyama found that,

surprisingly, Carlin didn’t either. Problems began to arise soon after the

merger: every time Katsuyama tried to complete a trade, the offers would

vanish off his screen. At first, he assumed it was a problem with Carlin’s

systems, but gradually he learned that many Wall Street investors were

1-1 Demonstrate the importance of interpersonal skills in the workplace.

1-2 Define organizational behavior (OB).

1-3 Show the value to OB of systematic study.

1-4 Identify the major behavioral science disciplines that contribute to OB.

1-5 Demonstrate why few absolutes apply to OB.

1-6 Identify managers’ challenges and opportunities in applying OB concepts.

1-7 Compare the three levels of analysis in this text’s OB model.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

4 PART 1 Introduction

experiencing the same problem. “I now see that it isn’t just me,” Katsuyama

said. “My frustration is the market’s frustration. And I was like, ‘Whoa, this

is serious.’”

Katsuyama knew help would not come from Carlin—its people didn’t

have the knowledge. Now RBC’s newly appointed head of electronic trading,

he did what he’d done before—he surrounded himself with people who were

“RBC nice,” and smart. He formed a team to figure out why the electronic trading system worked lucratively for some traders and miserably for others.

The team learned that the more stock exchanges used it to place orders, the

fewer orders were filled due to the “vanishing market.” Why? Technologist

Rob Park found it all came down to milliseconds. One millisecond can equal

500 quote changes and about 150 trades, but only for companies that have

fantastic physical network connections. Programmer Allen Zhang confirmed

the diagnosis by writing a program that delayed the transmissions of orders

through the faster exchanges so the orders to all exchanges arrived at the

same time. Katsuyama concluded, “There’s no way I’m the first guy to have figured

this out. So what happened to everyone else?” The answer: Any firm that

figured out the timing discrepancy was keeping it secret and profiting from it.

Katsuyama couldn’t stand the injustice. He and his team went on the hunt

for the profiteers and found profound moral apathy among them—those

who profited would not seek change, no matter how corrupt and sinister the

game became. Katsuyama told his wife, “I think there’s only a few people in the world

who can do anything about this. If I don’t do something right now—me, Brad

Katsuyama—there’s no one to call.” He quit his job and, with fellow war-

riors Park and trading strategist Ronan Ryan, created a new independent

exchange to protect investors from Wall Street’s predators. The result was

their new company IEX, the Investors Exchange, and in December 2013, its

rate of exchange was greater than that of AMEX. It has now surpassed four

of the 13 U.S. exchanges—the NYSE MKT, the Chicago Stock Exchange,

the National Stock Exchange, and the CBOE Stock Exchange. Katsuyama

and his band of warriors are now seeking reform measures for all stock

exchanges.

Sources: H. Lash, “Trading Venue IEX Urges Reform of Stock Exchange Governance,” Reuters  (December 11, 2014), http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/11/markets- iex-governance-idUSL1N0TV1XK20141211; M. Lewis, “The Wolf Hunters of Wall Street,” The New York Times Magazine (March 31, 2014), http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/ magazine/flash-boys-michael-lewis.html?emc=eta1; and E. Picardo, “How IEX Is Combating Predatory Types of High-Frequency Traders,” Forbes (April 23, 2014), http://www.forbes .com/sites/investopedia/2014/04/23/how-iex-is-combating-predatory-types-of-high- frequency-traders/.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 5

The details of this story are at once disheartening and inspiring, reflecting the increasing complexity of organizational life. They also highlight several issues of interest to those of us seeking to understand organizational behavior, including motivation, ethics, emotions, personality, and culture. Throughout this text, you’ll learn how we can systematically study all these elements.

The Importance of Interpersonal Skills Until the late 1980s, business school curricula emphasized the technical aspects of management, focusing on economics, accounting, finance, and quantitative techniques. Course work in human behavior and people skills received relatively less attention. Since then, however, business schools have realized the signifi- cant role interpersonal skills play in determining a manager’s effectiveness. In fact, a survey of over 2,100 CFOs across 20 industries indicated that a lack of interpersonal skills is the top reason why some employees fail to advance.1

Incorporating OB principles into the workplace can yield many important organizational outcomes. For one, companies known as good places to work— such as Genentech, the Boston Consulting Group, Qualcomm, McKinsey & Company, Procter & Gamble, Facebook, and Southwest Airlines2—have been found to generate superior financial performance.3 Second, developing manag- ers’ interpersonal skills helps organizations attract and keep high-performing employees, which is important since outstanding employees are always in short supply and are costly to replace. Third, there are strong associations between the quality of workplace relationships and employee job satisfaction, stress, and turnover. One very large survey of hundreds of workplaces and more than 200,000 respondents showed that social relationships among coworkers and supervisors were strongly related to overall job satisfaction. Positive social rela- tionships also were associated with lower stress at work and lower intentions

1-1 Demonstrate the importance of interpersonal skills in the workplace.

IBM Chief Executive Virginia Rometty has the interpersonal skills required to succeed in management. Communication and leadership skills distinguish managers such as Rometty, who rise to the top of their profession. Shown here at a meeting in Beijing, Rometty is an innovative leader capable of driving IBM’s entrepreneurial culture. Source: Li Tao/Xinhua Press/Corbis

6 PART 1 Introduction

to quit.4 Further research indicates that employees who relate to their manag- ers with supportive dialogue and proactivity find that their ideas are endorsed more often, which improves workplace satisfaction.5 Fourth, increasing the OB element in organizations can foster social responsibility awareness. Accordingly, universities have begun to incorporate social entrepreneurship education into their curriculum in order to train future leaders to address social issues within their organizations.6 This is especially important because there is a growing need for understanding the means and outcomes of corporate social responsi- bility, known as CSR.7

We understand that in today’s competitive and demanding workplace, managers can’t succeed on their technical skills alone. They also have to exhibit good people skills. This text has been written to help both managers and potential managers develop those people skills with the knowledge that under- standing human behavior provides.

Try IT! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: What Is Management?

Management and Organizational Behavior Let’s begin by briefly defining the terms manager and organization. First, the defining characteristic of managers is that they get things done through other people. They make decisions, allocate resources, and direct the activities of oth- ers to attain goals. Managers are sometimes called administrators, especially in not-for-profit organizations. They do their work in an organization, which is a consciously coordinated social unit, composed of two or more people, that func- tions on a relatively continuous basis to achieve a common goal or set of goals. By this definition, manufacturing and service firms are organizations, and so are schools, hospitals, churches, military units, nonprofits, police departments, and local, state, and federal government agencies.

More than ever, a manager is someone placed into the position without man- agement training or informed experience. According to a large-scale survey, more than 58 percent of managers reported they had not received any training and 25 percent admitted they were not ready to lead others when they were given the role.8 Added to that challenge, the demands of the job have increased: the average manager has seven direct reports (five was once the norm), and has less manage- ment time to spend with them than before.9 Considering that a Gallup poll found organizations chose the wrong candidate for management positions 82 percent of the time,10 we conclude that the more you can learn about people and how to manage them, the better prepared you will be to be that right candidate. OB will help you get there. Let’s start with identifying the manager’s primary activities.

The work of managers can be condensed to four activities: planning, organiz- ing, leading, and controlling. The planning function encompasses defining an organization’s goals, establishing an overall strategy for achieving those goals, and developing a comprehensive set of plans to integrate and coordinate activi- ties. Evidence indicates the need for planning increases the most as managers move from lower-level to mid-level management.11

When managers engage in designing their work unit’s structure, they are organizing. The organizing function includes determining what tasks are to be done, who is to do them, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and where decisions are to be made.

1-2 Define organizational behavior (OB).

manager An individual who achieves goals through other people.

organization A consciously coordinated social unit, composed of two or more people, that functions on a relatively continuous basis to achieve a common goal or set of goals.

controlling Monitoring activities to ensure they are being accomplished as planned and correcting any significant deviations.

planning A process that includes defining goals, establishing strategy, and developing plans to coordinate activities.

organizing Determining what tasks are to be done, who is to do them, how the tasks are to be grouped, who reports to whom, and where decisions are to be made.

leading A function that includes motivat- ing employees, directing others, selecting the most effective communication channels, and resolving conflicts.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 7

Every organization contains people, and it is management’s job to direct and coordinate those people. This is the leading function. When managers motivate employees, direct their activities, select the most effective communica- tion channels, or resolve conflicts, they’re engaging in leading.

To ensure things are going as they should, management must monitor the organization’s performance and compare it with previously set goals. If there are any significant deviations, it is management’s job to get the organization back on track. This monitoring, comparing, and potential correcting is the controlling function.

Management roles Henry Mintzberg, now a prominent management scholar, undertook a careful study of executives to determine what they did on their jobs early in his career. On the basis of his observations, Mintzberg concluded that managers perform 10 different, highly interrelated roles, or sets of behaviors, and serve a critical function in organizations.12 As shown in Exhibit 1-1, these 10 roles are primar- ily (1) interpersonal, (2) informational, or (3) decisional. Although much has changed in the world of work since Mintzberg developed this model, research indicates the roles have changed very little.13

interpersonal roles All managers are required to perform duties that are ceremonial and symbolic in nature. For instance, when the president of a college hands out diplomas at commencement or a factory supervisor gives a group of high school students a tour of the plant, they are acting in a figure- head role. Another key interpersonal role all managers have is a leadership role.

Source: Mintzberg, Henry, The Nature of Managerial Work, 1st Ed., © 1973, pp. 92–93. Reprinted and Electronically reproduced

by permission of Pearson Education, Inc., New York, NY.

Minztberg’s Managerial rolesExhibit 1-1

Role Description

Interpersonal

Figurehead Symbolic head; required to perform a number of routine duties of a legal or social nature

Leader Responsible for the motivation and direction of employees Liaison Maintains a network of outside contacts who provide favors

and information

Informational

Monitor Receives a wide variety of information; serves as nerve center of internal and external information of the organization

Disseminator Transmits information received from outsiders or from other employees to members of the organization

Spokesperson Transmits information to outsiders on organization’s plans, policies, actions, and results; serves as expert on organization’s industry

Decisional

Entrepreneur Searches organization and its environment for opportunities and initiates projects to bring about change

Disturbance handler Responsible for corrective action when organization faces important, unexpected disturbances

Resource allocator Makes or approves significant organizational decisions Negotiator Responsible for representing the organization at major

negotiations

8 PART 1 Introduction

This role includes hiring, training, motivating, and disciplining employees. The third role within the interpersonal grouping is the liaison role, or contacting and fostering relationships with others who provide valuable information. The sales manager who obtains information from the quality-control manager in his own company has an internal liaison relationship. When that sales manager has contact with other sales executives through a marketing trade association, he has external liaison relationships.

informational roles All managers, to some degree, collect information from outside organizations and institutions, typically by scanning the news media and talking with other people to learn of changes in the public’s tastes, what com- petitors may be planning, and the like. Mintzberg called this the monitor role. Managers also act as a conduit to transmit information to organizational mem- bers. This is the disseminator role. In addition, managers perform a spokesperson role when they represent the organization to outsiders.

Decisional roles Mintzberg identified four roles that require making choices. In  the entrepreneur role, managers initiate and oversee new projects that will improve their organization’s performance. As disturbance handlers, managers take corrective action in response to unforeseen problems. As resource allocators, managers are responsible for allocating human, physical, and monetary resources. Finally, managers perform a negotiator role, in which they discuss issues and bar- gain with other units (internal or external) to gain advantages for their own unit.

Management Skills Still another way of considering what managers do is to look at the skills or competencies they need to achieve their goals. Researchers have identified a number of skills that differentiate effective from ineffective managers.14 Each of these skills is important, and all are needed to become a well-rounded and effective manager.

technical Skills Technical skills encompass the ability to apply specialized knowledge or expertise. When you think of the skills of professionals such as civil engineers or oral surgeons, you typically focus on the technical skills they have learned through extensive formal education. Of course, professionals don’t have a monopoly on technical skills, and not all technical skills have to be learned in schools or other formal training programs. All jobs require some specialized expertise, and many people develop their technical skills on the job.

Human Skills The ability to understand, communicate with, motivate, and sup- port other people, both individually and in groups, defines human skills. Many people may be technically proficient but poor listeners, unable to understand the needs of others, or weak at managing conflicts. Because managers get things done through other people, they must have good human skills.

Conceptual Skills Managers must have the mental ability to analyze and diag- nose complex situations. These tasks require conceptual skills. Decision mak- ing, for instance, requires managers to identify problems, develop alternative solutions to correct those problems, evaluate those alternative solutions, and select the best one. After they have selected a course of action, managers must be able to organize a plan of action and then execute it. The ability to integrate new ideas with existing processes and innovate on the job are also crucial con- ceptual skills for today’s managers.

technical skills The ability to apply specialized knowledge or expertise.

human skills The ability to work with, understand, and motivate other people, both individually and in groups.

conceptual skills The mental ability to analyze and diagnose complex situations.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 9

effective versus Successful Managerial activities Fred Luthans and his associates looked at what managers do from a somewhat different perspective.15 They asked, “Do managers who move up most quickly in an organization do the same activities and with the same emphasis as managers who do the best job?” You might think the answer is yes, but that’s not always the case.

Luthans and his associates studied more than 450 managers. All engaged in four managerial activities:

1. Traditional management. Decision making, planning, and controlling. 2. Communication. Exchanging routine information and processing

paperwork. 3. Human resource management. Motivating, disciplining, managing

conflict, staffing, and training. 4. Networking. Socializing, politicking, and interacting with outsiders.

The “average” manager spent 32 percent of his or her time in traditional management activities, 29 percent communicating, 20 percent in human resource management activities, and 19 percent networking. However, the time and effort different individual managers spent on those activities varied a great deal. As shown in Exhibit 1-2, among managers who were successful (defined in terms of speed of promotion within their organization), networking made the largest relative contribution to success, and human resource management activities made the least relative contribution. Among effective managers (defined in terms of quantity and quality of their performance and the satisfaction and commitment of employees), communication made the largest relative contribu- tion and networking the least. Other studies in Australia, Israel, Italy, Japan, and the United States confirm the link between networking, social relationships, and success within an organization.16 The connection between communica- tion and effective managers is also clear. Managers who explain their decisions and seek information from colleagues and employees—even if the information turns out to be negative—are the most effective.17

This research offers important insights. Successful (in terms of promotion) managers give almost the opposite emphases to traditional management, communication, human resource management, and networking as do effective

allocation of activities by timeExhibit 1-2

Source: Based on F. Luthans, R. M. Hodgetts, and S. A. Rosenkrantz, Real Managers (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1988).

Average managers

Effective managers

Successful managers

19% 19%

48%

11%

11%

28%

13%

26%

44%

20%

29%

32%

Traditional management Communication

Human resource management Networking

When you see this icon, Global OB issues are being discussed in the paragraph.

10 PART 1 Introduction

managers. This finding challenges the historical assumption that promotions are based on performance, and it illustrates the importance of networking and political skills in getting ahead in organizations.

Now that we’ve established what managers do, we need to study how best to do these things. Organizational behavior (OB) is a field of study that investigates the impact individuals, groups, and structure have on behavior within organiza- tions, for the purpose of applying such knowledge toward improving an organi- zation’s effectiveness. That’s a mouthful, so let’s break it down.

OB is a field of study, meaning that it is a distinct area of expertise with a common body of knowledge. What does it study? It studies three determinants of behavior in organizations: individuals, groups, and structure. In addition, OB applies the knowledge gained about individuals, groups, and the effect of struc- ture on behavior in order to make organizations work more effectively.

To sum up our definition, OB is the study of what people do in an organiza- tion and the way their behavior affects the organization’s performance. Because OB is concerned specifically with employment-related situations, it examines behavior in the context of job satisfaction, absenteeism, employment turnover, productivity, human performance, and management. Although debate exists about the relative importance of each, OB includes these core topics:

• Motivation • Leader behavior and power • Interpersonal communication • Group structure and processes • Attitude development and perception • Change processes • Conflict and negotiation • Work design18

organizational behavior (OB) A field of study that investigates the impact individuals, groups, and structure have on behavior within organizations, for the purpose of applying such knowledge toward improving an organi- zation’s effectiveness.

Internet retailer Zappos.com under- stands how organizational behavior affects an organization’s performance. The firm maintains good employee relationships by offering generous ben- efits, extensive training, and a positive work environment in which employees are encouraged “to create fun and a little weirdness.” Source: Ronda Churchill/Bloomberg/Getty Images

WaTch IT! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Herman Miller: Organizational Behavior.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 11

Complementing Intuition with Systematic Study Whether you’ve explicitly thought about it before or not, you’ve been “reading” people almost all your life by watching their actions and interpreting what you see, or by trying to predict what people might do under different conditions. The casual approach to reading others can often lead to erroneous predictions, but using a systematic approach can improve your accuracy.

Underlying the systematic approach in this text is the belief that behavior is not random. Rather, we can identify fundamental consistencies underlying the behavior of all individuals and modify them to reflect individual differences.

These fundamental consistencies are very important. Why? Because they allow predictability. Behavior is generally predictable, and the systematic study of behavior is a means to making reasonably accurate predictions. When we use the term systematic study, we mean looking at relationships, attempting to attri- bute causes and effects, and basing our conclusions on scientific evidence—that is, on data gathered under controlled conditions and measured and interpreted in a rigorous manner.

Evidence-based management (EBM) complements systematic study by basing managerial decisions on the best available scientific evidence. For example, we want doctors to make decisions about patient care based on the latest available evidence, and EBM argues that managers should do the same, thinking more scientifically about management problems. A manager might pose a question, search for the best available evidence, and apply the relevant information to the question or case at hand. You might wonder what manager would not base decisions on evidence, but the vast majority of management decisions are still made “on the fly,” with little to no systematic study of avail- able evidence.19

Systematic study and EBM add to intuition, or those “gut feelings” about what makes others (and ourselves) “tick.” Of course, the things you have come to believe in an unsystematic way are not necessarily incorrect. Jack Welch (for- mer CEO of General Electric) noted, “The trick, of course, is to know when to go with your gut.” But if we make all decisions with intuition or gut instinct, we’re likely working with incomplete information—like making an investment decision with only half the data about the potential for risk and reward.

Relying on intuition is made worse because we tend to overestimate the accu- racy of what we think we know. Surveys of human resource managers have also shown that many managers hold “commonsense” opinions regarding effective management that have been flatly refuted by empirical evidence.

We find a similar problem in chasing the business and popular media for management wisdom. The business press tends to be dominated by fads. As a writer for The New Yorker put it, “Every few years, new companies succeed, and they are scrutinized for the underlying truths they might reveal. But often there is no underlying truth; the companies just happened to be in the right place at the right time.”20 Although we try to avoid it, we might also fall into this trap. It’s not that the business press stories are all wrong; it’s that without a systematic approach, it’s hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Big Data Data has been used to evaluate behavior since at least 1749, when the word “statistic” was coined to mean a “description of the state.”21 Statistics back then were used for purposes of governance, but since the data collection methods

1-3 Show the value to OB of systematic study.

systematic study Looking at relation- ships, attempting to attribute causes and effects, and drawing conclusions based on scientific evidence.

evidence-based management (EBM) The basing of managerial decisions on the best available scientific evidence.

intuition An instinctive feeling not necessarily supported by research.

12 PART 1 Introduction

were clumsy and simplistic, so were the conclusions. “Big data”—the extensive use of statistical compilation and analysis—didn’t become possible until com- puters were sophisticated enough to both store and manipulate large amounts of information. Let’s look at the roots of the application of big data for business, which originated in the marketing department of online retailers.

Background It’s difficult to believe now, but not long ago companies treat- ed online shopping as a virtual point-of-sale experience: shoppers browsed websites anonymously, and sellers tracked sales data only on what customers bought. Gradually, though, online retailers began to track and act upon infor- mation about customer preferences that was uniquely available through the Internet shopping experience, information that was far superior to data gath- ered in simple store transactions. This enabled them to create more targeted

This is mostly a myth, but with a caveat. Management by walking around (MBWA) is an organization- al principle made famous with the 1982 publication of In Search of Excellence and based upon a 1970s initiative by Hewlett-Packard—in other words, it’s a dinosaur. Years of research indicate that effective management practices are not built around MBWA. But the idea of requiring managers at all levels of the organization to wander around their de- partments to observe, converse, and hear from employees continues as a common business practice.

Many companies expecting man- agers and executives to do regular “floor time” have claimed benefits from increased employee engage- ment to deeper management under- standing of company issues. A recent three-year study also suggested that a modified form of MBWA may signifi- cantly improve safety in organizations as employees become more mindful of following regulatory procedures when supervisors observe and monitor them frequently.

While MBWA sounds helpful, its limitations suggest that modern prac- tices focused on building trust and relationships are more effective for

management. Limitations include avail- able hours, focus, and application.

1. Available hours. Managers are charged with planning, organizing, coordinating, and controlling, yet even CEOs—the managers who should be the most in control of their time—report spending 53 percent of their average 55-hour workweek in time-wasting meetings.

2. Focus. MBWA turns management’s focus toward the concerns of employ- ees. This is good, but only to a de- gree. As noted by Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn, “Part of the key to time man- agement is carving out time to think, as opposed to constantly reacting. And during that thinking time, you’re not only thinking strategically, thinking proactively, thinking longer-term, but you’re literally thinking about what is urgent versus important.” Weiner and other CEOs argue that meetings dis- tract them from their purpose.

3. Application. The principle behind MBWA is that the more managers know their employees, the more ef- fective those managers will be. This is not always (or even often) true. As we’ll learn in Chapter 6, knowing something (or thinking we know it) should not

always lead us to act on only that infor- mation because our internal decision making is subjective. We need objec- tive data to make the most effective management decisions.

Based on the need for managers to dedicate their efforts to administering and growing businesses, and given the proven effectiveness of objective per- formance measures, it seems the time for MBWA is gone. Yet there is that one caveat: managers should know their employees well. As Rick Russell, CEO of Greer Laboratories, says, “Foster- ing close ties with your lieutenants is the stuff that gets results. You have to rally the troops. You can’t do it from a memo.” Management should therefore not substitute walking around for true management.

Sources: G. Luria and I. Morag, “Safety Man- agement by Walking Around (SMBWA): A Safety Intervention Program Based on Both Peer and Manager Participation,” Accident Analysis and Prevention (March 2012): 248– 57; J. S. Lublin, “Managers Need to Make Time for Face Time,” The Wall Street Journal (March 17, 2015), http://www.wsj.com/ ar ticles/managers-need-to-make-time- for-face-time-1426624214; and R. E. Silver- man, “Where’s the Boss? Trapped in a Meet- ing,” The Wall Street Journal (February 14, 2012), B1, B9.

Management by Walking around is the Most effective Management

Myth or Science?

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 13

marketing strategies than ever before. The bookselling industry is a case in point: Before online selling, brick-and-mortar bookstores could collect data about book sales only to create projections about consumer interests and trends. With the advent of Amazon, suddenly a vast array of information about consumer preferences became available for tracking: what customers bought, what they looked at, how they navigated the site, and what they were influenced by (such as promotions, reviews, and page presentation). The challenge for Amazon then was to identify which statistics were persistent, giving relatively constant outcomes over time, and predictive, showing steady causality between certain inputs and outcomes. The company used these statistics to develop al- gorithms to forecast which books customers would like to read next. Amazon then could base its wholesale purchase decisions on the feedback customers provided, both through these passive collection methods and through solicited recommendations for upcoming titles.

Current Usage No matter how many terabytes of data firms can collect or from how many sources, the reasons for data analytics include: predicting any event, from a book purchase to a spacesuit malfunction; detecting how much risk is incurred at any time, from the risk of a fire to that of a loan default; and preventing catastrophes large and small, from a plane crash to an overstock of product.22 With big data, U.S. defense contractor BAE Systems protects it- self from cyber-attacks, San Francisco’s Bank of the West uses customer data to create tiered pricing systems, and London’s Graze.com analyzes customers’ preferences to select snack samples to send with their orders.23

Naturally, big data has been used by technology companies like Google and Facebook, who rely on advertising dollars for revenue and thus need to predict user behavior. Companies like Netflix and Uber similarly use big data to pre- dict where and when customers may want to use their virtual services, although their revenue comes from subscribers to their services. Insurance firms pre- dict behavior to assess risks, such as the chance of traffic accidents, in order to set customer premiums. Even museums like the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York, the Dallas Museum of Art, and the Minneapolis Institute of Arts analyze data from transmitters, kiosks, and surveys to cater to their pay- ing guests.24

Online retailers like eBay and Amazon that market tangible products through online platforms also rely on big data to predict what will sell. For orga- nizations like Nielson Holdings, which tracks television and radio watching, the results of data analyses are the product they sell. Still other organizations collect big data but do not directly use it. These are often organizations whose primary business is not online. Kroger, a U.S. grocery store chain, electronically collects information from 55 million customers who have loyalty cards and sells the data to vendors who stock Kroger’s shelves.25 Sometimes even technology companies simply sell their data; Twitter sells 500 million tweets a day to four data assimila- tion companies.26

New trends While accessibility to data increases organizations’ ability to pre- dict human behavioral trends, the use of big data for understanding, helping, and managing people is relatively new but holds promise. In fact, research on 10,000 workers in China, Germany, India, the United Kingdom, and the Unit- ed States indicated that employees expect the next transformation in the way people work will rely more on technological advancements than on any other factor, such as demographic changes.27

It is good news for the future of business that researchers, the media, and company leaders have identified the potential of data-driven management and

14 PART 1 Introduction

decision making. A manager who uses data to define objectives, develop theo- ries of causality, and test those theories can determine which employee activities are relevant to the objectives.28 Big data has implications for correcting man- agement assumptions and increasing positive performance outcomes. Increas- ingly, it is applied toward making effective decisions (Chapter 6) and managing human resources (HR; Chapter 17). It is quite possible that the best use of big data in managing people will come from organizational behavior and psychol- ogy research, where it might even help employees with mental illnesses monitor and change their behavior.29

limitations As technological capabilities for handling big data have increased, so have issues of privacy. This is particularly true when data collection includes surveillance instruments. For instance, an experiment in Brooklyn, New York, has been designed to improve the quality of life for residents, but the research- ers will collect intensive data from infrared cameras, sensors, and smartphone Wi-Fi signals.30 Through similar methods of surveillance monitoring, a bank call center and a pharmaceutical company found that employees were more productive with more social interaction, so they changed their break time poli- cies so more people took breaks together. They then saw sales increase and turnover decrease. Bread Winners Café in Dallas, Texas, constantly monitors all employees in the restaurant through surveillance and uses the data to promote or discipline its servers.31

These big data tactics and others might yield results—and research indi- cates that, in fact, electronic performance monitoring does increase task per- formance and citizenship behavior (helping behaviors towards others), at least in the short term.32 But critics point out that after Frederick Taylor introduced surveillance analytics in 1911 to increase productivity through monitoring and feedback controls, his management control techniques were surpassed by Alfred Sloan’s greater success with management outcomes, achieved by provid- ing meaningful work to employees.33 This brings up a larger concern: What do people think about big data when they are the source of the data? Organiza- tions using big data run the risk of offending the very people they are trying to influence: employees and customers. As Alderman Bob Fioretti said about the 65 sensors installed on Chicago’s streets, “This type of invasion is a very slippery slope.”34

We must keep in mind that big data will always be limited in predicting behavior, curtailing risk, and preventing catastrophes. In contrast to the repli- cable results we can obtain in the sciences through big data analytics, human behavior is often capricious and predicated on innumerable variables. Other- wise, our decision making would have been taken over by artificial intelligence by now! But that will never be a worthy goal.35 Management is more than the sum of data.

Therefore, we are not advising you to throw intuition out the window. In dealing with people, leaders often rely on hunches, and sometimes the out- comes are excellent. At other times, human tendencies get in the way. Alex Pentland, a celebrated MIT data scientist, proposes a new science termed social physics, which is based on improving the way ideas and behaviors travel. Stud- ies on social physics would lead to subtler forms of data collection and analysis than some of the more intrusive surveillance methods mentioned previously, while still intending to inform managers on how to help employees focus their energies.36 The prudent use of big data, along with an understanding of human behavioral tendencies, can contribute to sound decision making and ease natu- ral biases. What we are advising is to use evidence as much as possible to inform your intuition and experience. That is the promise of OB.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 15

Disciplines That Contribute to the OB Field OB is an applied behavioral science built on contributions from a number of behavioral disciplines, mainly psychology and social psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Psychology’s contributions have been principally at the individu- al or micro level of analysis, while the other disciplines have contributed to our understanding of macro concepts such as group processes and organization. Exhibit 1-3 is an overview of the major contributions to the study of organiza- tional behavior.

Psychology Psychology seeks to measure, explain, and sometimes change the behavior of humans and other animals. Contributors to the knowledge of OB are learning theorists, personality theorists, counseling psychologists and, most important, industrial and organizational psychologists.

1-4 Identify the major behavioral science disciplines that contribute to OB.

psychology The science that seeks to measure, explain, and sometimes change the behavior of humans and other animals.

toward an oB DisciplineExhibit 1-3

Sociology

Social psychology

Anthropology

Psychology

Behavioral science

OutputUnit of analysis

Contribution

Learning Motivation Personality Emotions Perception Training Leadership effectiveness Job satisfaction Individual decision making Performance appraisal Attitude measurement Employee selection Work design Work stress

Behavioral change Attitude change Communication Group processes Group decision making

Formal organization theory Organizational technology Organizational change Organizational culture

Comparative values Comparative attitudes Cross-cultural analysis

Organizational culture Organizational environment Power

Communication Power Conflict Intergroup behavior

Study of organizational

behavior

Organization system

Individual

Group

16 PART 1 Introduction

that everyone likes complex and challenging work (a general concept). Why? Because not everyone wants a challenging job. Some people prefer routine over varied work, or simple over complex tasks. A job attractive to one person may not be to another; its appeal is contingent on the person who holds it. Often, we’ll find both general effects (money does have some ability to motivate most of us) and contingencies (some of us are more motivated by money than others, and some situations are more about money than others). We’ll best understand OB when we realize how both (general effects, and the contingencies that affect them) often guide behavior.

Challenges and Opportunities for OB Understanding organizational behavior has never been more important for managers. Take a quick look at the dramatic changes in organizations. The typi- cal employee is getting older; the workforce is becoming increasingly diverse; and global competition requires employees to become more flexible and cope with rapid change.

As a result of these changes and others, employment options have adapted to include new opportunities for workers. Exhibit 1-4 details some of the types of options individuals may find offered to them by organizations or for which they would like to negotiate. Under each heading in the exhibit, you will find a grouping of options from which to choose—or combine. For instance, at one point in your career you may find yourself employed full time in an office in a localized, nonunion setting with a salary and bonus compensation pack- age, while at another point you may wish to negotiate for a flextime, virtual

contingency variables Situational factors: variables that moderate the relationship between two or more variables.

1-6 Identify managers’ challenges and opportunities in applying OB concepts.

Early industrial/organizational psychologists studied the problems of fatigue, boredom, and other working conditions that could impede efficient work per- formance. More recently, their contributions have expanded to include learn- ing, perception, personality, emotions, training, leadership effectiveness, needs and motivational forces, job satisfaction, decision-making processes, perfor- mance appraisals, attitude measurement, employee-selection techniques, work design, and job stress.

Social Psychology Social psychology, generally considered a branch of psychology, blends concepts from both psychology and sociology to focus on people’s influence on one another. One major study area is change—how to implement it and how to reduce barriers to its acceptance. Social psychologists also contribute to measuring, understanding, and changing attitudes; identifying communication patterns; and building trust. Finally, they have made important contributions to our study of group behavior, power, and conflict.

Sociology While psychology focuses on the individual, sociology studies people in rela- tion to their social environment or culture. Sociologists have contributed to OB through their study of group behaviors in organizations, particularly formal and complex organizations. Perhaps most important, sociologists have studied organizational culture, formal organization theory and structure, organization- al technology, communications, power, and conflict.

anthropology Anthropology is the study of societies to learn about human beings and their activities. Anthropologists’ work on cultures and environments has helped us understand differences in fundamental values, attitudes, and behavior among people in different countries and within different organizations. Much of our current understanding of organizational culture, organizational climate, and differences among national cultures is a result of the work of anthropologists or those using their methods.

There Are Few Absolutes in OB Laws in the physical sciences—chemistry, astronomy, physics—are consistent and apply in a wide range of situations. They allow scientists to generalize about the pull of gravity or to be confident about sending astronauts into space to repair satellites. Human beings are complex, and few, if any, simple and uni- versal principles explain organizational behavior. Because we are not alike, our ability to make simple, accurate, and sweeping generalizations about ourselves is limited. Two people often act very differently in the same situation, and the same person’s behavior changes in different situations. For example, not every- one is motivated by money, and people may behave differently at a religious service than they do at a party.

That doesn’t mean, of course, that we can’t offer reasonably accurate expla- nations of human behavior or make valid predictions. It does mean that OB concepts must reflect situational, or contingency, conditions. We can say x leads to y, but only under conditions specified in z—the contingency variables. The science of OB was developed by applying general concepts to a particu- lar situation, person, or group. For example, OB scholars would avoid stating

social psychology An area of psychology that blends concepts from psychology and sociology to focus on the influence of people on one another.

sociology The study of people in relation to their social environment or culture.

anthropology The study of societies to learn about human beings and their activities.

1-5 Demonstrate why few absolutes apply to OB.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 17

that everyone likes complex and challenging work (a general concept). Why? Because not everyone wants a challenging job. Some people prefer routine over varied work, or simple over complex tasks. A job attractive to one person may not be to another; its appeal is contingent on the person who holds it. Often, we’ll find both general effects (money does have some ability to motivate most of us) and contingencies (some of us are more motivated by money than others, and some situations are more about money than others). We’ll best understand OB when we realize how both (general effects, and the contingencies that affect them) often guide behavior.

Challenges and Opportunities for OB Understanding organizational behavior has never been more important for managers. Take a quick look at the dramatic changes in organizations. The typi- cal employee is getting older; the workforce is becoming increasingly diverse; and global competition requires employees to become more flexible and cope with rapid change.

As a result of these changes and others, employment options have adapted to include new opportunities for workers. Exhibit 1-4 details some of the types of options individuals may find offered to them by organizations or for which they would like to negotiate. Under each heading in the exhibit, you will find a grouping of options from which to choose—or combine. For instance, at one point in your career you may find yourself employed full time in an office in a localized, nonunion setting with a salary and bonus compensation pack- age, while at another point you may wish to negotiate for a flextime, virtual

contingency variables Situational factors: variables that moderate the relationship between two or more variables.

1-6 Identify managers’ challenges and opportunities in applying OB concepts.

Sources: J. R. Anderson Jr., et al., “Action Items: 42 Trends Affecting Benefits, Compensation, Training, Staffing and Technology,” HR Magazine (January 2013) p. 33; M. Dewhurst, B. Hancock, and D.

Ellsworth, “Redesigning Knowledge Work,” Harvard Business Review (January–February 2013), pp. 58–64; E. Frauenheim, “Creating a New Contingent Culture,” Workforce Management (August 2012),

pp. 34–39; N. Koeppen, “State Job Aid Takes Pressure off Germany,” The Wall Street Journal (February 1, 2013), p. A8; and M. A. Shaffer, M. L. Kraimer, Y.-P. Chen, and M. C. Bolino, “Choices, Chal-

lenges, and Career Consequences of Global Work Experiences: A Review and Future Agenda,” Journal of Management (July 2012), pp. 1282–1327.

employment optionsExhibit 1-4

Employed

Underemployed/ underutilized

Re-employed

Unemployed/jobless

Entrepreneur

Retired

Furloughed

Laid off

Categories of Employment

Job seeking

Places of Employment

Anchored (office/cubicle)

Floating (shared space)

Virtual

Flexible

Work from home

Compensation for Employment

Salary

Hourly

Overtime

Bonus

Contract

Time off

Benefits

Conditions of Employment

Local

Expatriate

Flexpatriate

International business traveler

Visa employee

Short-term assignee

Union/nonunion employee

Types of Employment

Job share

Contingent

Independent contractor

Temporary

Intern

Full-time

Part-time

Flextime

Reduced hours

18 PART 1 Introduction

position and choose to work from overseas for a combination of salary and extra paid time off.

In short, today’s challenges bring opportunities for managers to use OB con- cepts. In this section, we review some of the most critical issues confronting managers for which OB offers solutions—or at least meaningful insights toward solutions.

economic Pressures When the U.S. economy plunged into a deep and prolonged recession in 2008, virtually all other large economies around the world followed suit. Layoffs and job losses were widespread, and those who survived the ax were often asked to accept pay cuts. When times are bad, as they were during the recession, manag- ers are on the front lines with employees who are asked to make do with less, who worry about their futures, and who sometimes must be fired. The differ- ence between good and bad management can be the difference between profit and loss or, ultimately, between business survival and failure.

Managing employees well when times are tough is just as hard as when times are good, if not harder. In good times, understanding how to reward, satisfy, and retain employees is at a premium. In bad times, issues like stress, decision making, and coping come to the forefront.

Continuing Globalization Organizations are no longer constrained by national borders. Samsung, the largest South Korean business conglomerate, sells most of its products to organizations in other countries, Burger King is owned by a Brazilian firm, and McDonald’s sells hamburgers in more than 118 countries on six continents. Even what is arguably the U.S. company with the strongest U.S. identity— Apple— employs twice as many workers outside the United States as it does inside the country. And all major automobile makers now manufacture cars outside their borders; Honda builds cars in Ohio, Ford in Brazil, Volkswagen in Mexico, and both Mercedes and BMW in the United States and South Africa.

The world has become a global village. In the process, the manager’s job has changed. Effective managers will anticipate and adapt their approaches to the global issues we discuss next.

increased Foreign assignments You are increasingly likely to find yourself in a foreign assignment—transferred to your employer’s operating division or sub- sidiary in another country. Once there, you’ll have to manage a workforce very different in needs, aspirations, and attitudes from those you are used to back home. To be effective, you will need to understand everything you can about your new location’s culture and workforce—and demonstrate your cultural sen- sitivity—before introducing alternate practices.

Working with People from Different Cultures Even in your own country, you’ll find yourself working with bosses, peers, and other employees born and raised in different cultures. What motivates you may not motivate them. Or your communication style may be straightforward and open, which others may find uncomfortable and threatening. To work effectively with people from differ- ent cultures, you need to understand how their culture and background have shaped them and how to adapt your management style to fit any differences.

overseeing Movement of Jobs to Countries with low-Cost labor It is increas- ingly difficult for managers in advanced nations, where the minimum wage

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 19

can be as high as $16.88 an hour, to compete against firms that rely on workers from developing nations where labor is available for as little as nine cents an hour.37 In a global economy, jobs tend to flow where lower costs give busi- nesses a comparative advantage, though labor groups, politicians, and local community leaders see the exporting of jobs as undermining the job market at home. Managers face the difficult task of balancing the interests of their organizations with their responsibilities to the communities in which they operate.

adapting to Differing Cultural and regulatory Norms To be effective, managers need to know the cultural norms of the workforce in each country where they do business. For instance, in some countries a large percentage of the workforce enjoys long holidays. There will be country and local regulations to consider, too. Managers of subsidiaries abroad need to be aware of the unique finan- cial and legal regulations applying to “guest companies” or else risk violating them. Violations can have implications for their operations in that country and also for political relations between countries. Managers also need to be cogni- zant of differences in regulations for competitors in that country; many times, understanding the laws can lead to success or failure. For example, knowing lo- cal banking laws allowed one multinational firm—the Bank of China—to seize control of a storied (and very valuable) London building, Grosvenor House, from under the nose of the owner, the Indian hotel group Sahara. Management at Sahara contends that the loan default that led to the seizure was a misunder- standing regarding one of their other properties in New York.38 Globalization can get complicated.

Workforce Demographics The workforce has always adapted to variations in economies, longevity and birth rates, socioeconomic conditions, and other changes that have widespread impact. People adapt to survive, and OB studies the way those adaptations

Guy Woolaert, senior vice president and chief technical and innovation officer of the Coca-Cola Company, has worked effectively with people from many cultures. He learned from his 20 years of assignments abroad in Europe, the Pacific, and other geographic regions how to adapt his management style to reflect the values of different countries. Source: Robin Nelson/ZUMA Press/Newscom

20 PART 1 Introduction

affect individuals’ behavior. For instance, even though the 2008 global reces- sion ended years ago, some trends from those years are continuing: some people who have been long unemployed have left the workforce,39 while others have cobbled together several part-time jobs40 or settled for on-demand work.41 Further options that have been particularly popular for younger educated workers have included obtaining specialized industry training after  college,42 accepting full-time jobs that are lower-level,43 and starting their own companies.44 As students of OB, we can investigate what factors lead employees to make various choices and how their experiences affect their perceptions of their workplaces. In turn, this can help us predict organiza- tional outcomes.

Longevity and birth rates have also changed the dynamics in organiza- tions; global longevity rates have increased six years in a very short time (since 1990),45 while birth rates are decreasing for many developed countries, trends that together indicate a lasting shift toward an older workforce. OB research will help explain what this means for attitudes, organizational culture, leader- ship, structure, and communication. Finally, socioeconomic shifts have a pro- found effect on workforce demographics. The days when women stayed home because it was expected are just a memory in some cultures, while in others, women face significant barriers to entry into the workforce (see OB Poll). We are interested in how these women fare in the workplace, and how their condi- tions can be improved. This is just one illustration of how cultural and socio- economic changes affect the workplace, but it is one of many. We will discuss how OB can provide understanding and insight on workforce issues through- out this text.

PerSOnAL InvenTOry ASSeSSMenTS Multicultural awareness Scale Any study of organizational behavior (OB) starts with knowledge of yourself. As one step, take this PIA to determine your multicultural awareness.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

Ob POLL

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

1970

64.4% 67.6%

2022 (Projected)

56.0%

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

40.8%

53.2%

76.2%76.2% Men

Women

Percentage of Men and Women Working

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Women in the Labor Force: A Datebook” (2014), www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/women-in-the-labor-force-

a-databook-2014.pdf; and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Economic News Release,” (2013), http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.t02.htm.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 21

Workforce Diversity One of the most important challenges for organizations is workforce diversity, a trend by which organizations are becoming more heterogeneous in terms of employees’ gender, age, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and other character- istics. Managing this diversity is a global concern. Though we have more to say about it in the next chapter, suffice it to say here that diversity presents great opportunities and poses challenging questions for managers and employees. How can we leverage differences within groups for competitive advantage? Should we treat all employees alike? Should we recognize individual and cultural differences? What are the legal requirements in each country? Does increasing diversity even matter?

Customer Service Service employees include technical support representatives, fast-food workers, sales clerks, nurses, automobile repair technicians, consultants, financial plan- ners, and flight attendants. The shared characteristic of their jobs is substantial interaction with an organization’s customers. OB can help managers increase the success of these interactions by showing how employee attitudes and behav- ior influence customer satisfaction.

Many an organization has failed because its employees failed to please cus- tomers. Management needs to create a customer-responsive culture. OB can provide considerable guidance in helping managers create such cultures—in which employees establish rapport with customers, put customers at ease, show genuine interest, and are sensitive to a customer’s individual situation.46

People Skills As you proceed through the chapters of this text, we’ll present relevant con- cepts and theories that can help you explain and predict the behavior of people at work. You’ll also gain insights into specific people skills you can use on the job. For instance, you’ll learn ways to design motivating jobs, techniques for improving your management skills, and how to create more effective teams.

workforce diversity The concept that organizations are becoming more heteroge- neous in terms of gender, age, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and other characteristics.

A Whole Foods Market customer learns how to grind flour with the help of the store’s cooking coach, whose job is to provide information about cooking ingredients, methods, and techniques. Cooking coaches embody the best of the retailer’s customer- responsive culture of serving people with competency, efficiency, knowl- edge, and flair. Source: Evy Mages/The Washington Post/Getty

Images

22 PART 1 Introduction

Networked organizations Networked organizations allow people to communicate and work together even though they may be thousands of miles apart. Independent contractors can telecommute via computer and change employers as the demand for their services changes. Software programmers, graphic designers, systems analysts, technical writers, photo researchers, book and media editors, and medical tran- scribers are just a few examples of people who can work from home or other non-office locations.

The manager’s job is different in a networked organization. Motivat- ing and leading people and making collaborative decisions online require different techniques than when individuals are physically present in a single location. As more employees do their jobs by linking to others through net- works, managers must develop new skills. OB can provide valuable insights to help hone those skills.

Social Media As we will discuss in Chapter 11, social media in the business world is here to stay. Despite its pervasiveness, many organizations continue to struggle with em- ployees’ use of social media in the workplace. In February 2015, a Texas pizzeria fired an employee before she showed up for her first day of work after she tweet- ed unflattering comments about her future job. In December 2014, Nordstrom fired an Oregon employee who had posted a personal Facebook comment seeming to advocate violence against white police officers.47 These examples show that social media is a difficult issue for today’s manager, presenting both a challenge and an opportunity for OB. For instance, how much should HR look into a candidate’s social media presence? Should a hiring manager read the candidate’s Twitter feeds, or just do a quick perusal of her Facebook profile? We will discuss this issue later in the text.

Once employees are on the job, many organizations have policies about accessing social media at work—when, where, and for what purposes. But what about the impact of social media on employee well-being? One recent study found that subjects who woke up in a positive mood and then accessed Facebook frequently found their mood decreased during the day. Moreover, subjects who checked Facebook frequently over a two-week period reported a decreased level of satisfaction with their lives.48 Managers—and OB—are trying to increase employee satisfaction, and therefore improve and enhance positive organizational outcomes. We will discuss these issues further in Chapters 3 and 4.

employee Well-Being at Work The typical employee in the 1960s or 1970s showed up at a specified workplace Monday through Friday and worked for clearly defined 8- or 9-hour chunks of time. That’s no longer true for a large segment of today’s workforce, since the definition of the workplace has expanded to include anywhere a laptop or smartphone can go. However, even if employees work flexible hours at home or from half a continent away, managers need to consider their well- being at work.

One of the biggest challenges to maintaining employee well-being is the new reality that many workers never get away from the virtual workplace. And while communication technology allows many technical and profes- sional employees to do their work at home, in their cars, or on the beach in Tahiti, it also means many feel like they’re not part of a team. “The sense of

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 23

belonging is very challenging for virtual workers, who seem to be all alone out in cyberland,” said Ellen Raineri of Kaplan University.49 Another challenge is that organizations are asking employees to put in longer hours. According to one study, one in four employees shows signs of burnout, and two in three report high stress levels and fatigue.50 This may actually be an underestimate because workers report maintaining “always on” access for their managers through e-mail and texting. Finally, employee well-being is challenged by heavy outside commitments. Millions of single-parent employees and employees with dependent parents face significant challenges in balancing work and family responsibilities, for instance.

As a result of their increased responsibilities in and out of the workplace, employees want jobs that give them flexibility in their work schedules so they can better manage work–life conflicts.51 In fact, 56 percent of men and women in a recent study reported that work–life balance was their definition of career success, more than money, recognition, and autonomy.52 Most college and uni- versity students say attaining balance between personal life and work is a pri- mary career goal; they want a life as well as a job. Organizations that don’t help their people achieve work–life balance will find it increasingly difficult to attract and retain the most capable and motivated individuals.

As you’ll see in later chapters, the field of OB offers a number of suggestions to guide managers in designing workplaces and jobs that can help employees deal with work–life conflicts.

Positive Work environment A real growth area in OB research is positive organizational scholarship (also called positive organizational behavior), which studies how organizations develop human strengths, foster vitality and resilience, and unlock potential. Research- ers in this area say too much of OB research and management practice has been targeted toward identifying what’s wrong with organizations and their employees. In response, they try to study what’s good about them.53 Some key

positive organizational scholarship An area of OB research that concerns how organizations develop human strengths, foster vitality and resilience, and unlock potential.

Twitter employees rave about their company’s culture, which creates a positive work environment where smart and friendly colleagues learn; share values, ideas, and information; and work together to help the com- pany grow and succeed. At Twitter’s San Francisco headquarters, employees like Jenna Sampson, community relations manager, enjoy free meals, yoga classes, and a rooftop garden. Source: Noah Berger/Reuters

24 PART 1 Introduction

subjects in positive OB research are engagement, hope, optimism, and resil- ience in the face of strain. Researchers hope to help practitioners create positive work environments for employees.

Positive organizational scholars have studied a concept called “reflected best-self”—asking employees to think about when they were at their “per- sonal best” in order to understand how to exploit their strengths. The idea is that we all have things at which we are unusually good, yet we too often focus on addressing our limitations and too rarely think about how to exploit our strengths.54

Although positive organizational scholarship does not deny the value of the negative (such as critical feedback), it does challenge researchers to look at OB through a new lens and pushes organizations to exploit employees’ strengths rather than dwell on their limitations. One aspect of a positive work environment is the organization’s culture, the topic of Chapter 16. Organizational culture influences employee behavior so strongly that orga- nizations have begun to employ a culture officer to shape and preserve the company’s personality.55

ethical Behavior In an organizational world characterized by cutbacks, expectations of increas- ing productivity, and tough competition, it’s not surprising many employees feel pressured to cut corners, break rules, and engage in other questionable practices.

Increasingly they face ethical dilemmas and ethical choices, in which they are required to identify right and wrong conduct. Should they “blow the whis- tle” if they uncover illegal activities in their company? Do they follow orders with which they don’t personally agree? Do they “play politics” to advance their career?

What constitutes good ethical behavior has never been clearly defined and, in recent years, the line differentiating right from wrong has blurred. We see people all around us engaging in unethical practices—elected officials pad expense accounts or take bribes; corporate executives inflate profits to cash in lucrative stock options; and university administrators look the other way when winning coaches encourage scholarship athletes to take easy courses or even, in the recent case of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, sham courses with fake grades.56 When caught, people give excuses such as “Everyone does it” or “You have to seize every advantage.”

Determining the ethically correct way to behave is especially difficult for both managers and employees in a global economy because different cultures have different perspectives on certain ethical issues.57 The definition of fair treatment of employees in an economic downturn varies considerably across cultures, for instance. As we’ll see in Chapter 2, perceptions of religious, ethnic, and gender diversity also differ across countries.

Today’s manager must create an ethically healthy climate for employees in which they can do their work productively with minimal ambiguity about right and wrong behaviors. Companies that promote a strong ethical mission, encour- age employees to behave with integrity, and provide strong leadership can influ- ence employee decisions to behave ethically.58 Classroom training sessions in ethics have also proven helpful in maintaining a higher level of awareness of the implications of employee choices as long as the training sessions are given on an ongoing basis.59 In upcoming chapters, we’ll discuss the actions managers can take to create an ethically healthy climate and help employees sort through ambiguous situations.

ethical dilemmas and ethical choices Situations in which individuals are required to define right and wrong conduct.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 25

Do you work to live, or live to work? Those of us who think it’s a choice might be wrong. Almost a third of 1,000 respondents in a study by Kelton Research cited workload as a reason for not using allotted vacation days. Consider Ken Waltz, a director for Alexian Brothers Health System. He has 500 hours (approximately 3 months) in banked time off and no plans to spend it. “You’re on call 24/7 and these days, you’d better step up or step out,” he says, referring to today’s leaner workforce. “It’s not just me—it’s upper management. . . . It’s everybody.”

Many people feel pressure, spo- ken or unspoken, to work through their vacation days. Employers ex- pect workers to do more with less, putting pressure on workers to use all available resources—chiefly their time—to meet manager expectations. In today’s economy there is always a ready line of replacement workers, and many  employees will do everything possible to stay in their manager’s good graces.

The issue of vacation time is an ethical choice for the employer and, moreover, for the employee. Many or- ganizations have “use it or lose it” policies whereby employees forfeit the paid time off they’ve accrued for the year if they haven’t used it. When employees forfeit vacation, the risk of burnout increases. Skipping vacation time can wear you down emotionally, leading to exhaustion, negative feel- ings about your work, and a reduced feeling of accomplishment. You may

find you are absent more often, con- template leaving your job, and grow less likely to want to help anyone (in- cluding your managers). Even though these are negative consequences for your employer as well as for you per- sonally, often the employee must take charge of the situation. Here are some ways you can maintain your well-being and productivity:

1. Recognize your feelings. We solve few problems without first recog- nizing them. According to a recent study by ComPsych involving 2,000 employees, two in three identified high levels of stress, out-of-control feelings, and extreme fatigue.

2. Identify your tendency for burnout. Research on 2,089 employees found that burnout is especially acute for newcomers and job chang- ers. Burnout symptoms should level off after 2 years, but each individual experiences stress differently.

3. Talk about your stressors. Thomas Donohoe, a researcher on work–life balance, recommends talking with trusted friends or family. On the job, appropriately discussing your stress factors can help you reduce job overload.

4. Build in high physical activity. Research found an increase in job burnout (and depression) was stron- gest for employees who did not engage in regular physical activity, while it was almost negligible for employees who did engage in regular high physical activity.

5. Take brief breaks throughout your day. For office employees, the cur- rent expert suggestion is to spend at least 1 to 2 minutes of every hour standing up to combat the effects of all-day sitting. Donohoe also sug- gests snack breaks, walks, or short naps to recharge.

6. Take your vacation! Studies suggest that recovery from stress can hap- pen only if employees are (a) physi- cally away from work and (b) not oc- cupied by work-related duties. That means telling your manager that you will log off your e-mail accounts and shut off your phone for the duration of the vacation.

It is not always easy to look beyond the next deadline. But to maximize your long-term productivity and avoid stress, burnout, and illness—all of which are ultimately harmful to employer aims and employee careers alike—you should not succumb to vacation deficit disorder. Educate your managers. Your employer should thank you for it.

Sources: B. B. Dunford, A. J. Shipp, R. W. Boss, I. Angermeier, and A. D. Boss, “Is Burnout Static or Dynamic? A Career Tran- sition Perspective of Employee Burnout Trajectories,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 3 (2012): 637–50; E. J. Hirst, “Burn- out on the Rise,” Chicago Tribune, October 29, 2012, 3-1, 3-4; B. M. Rubin, “Rough Economy Means No Vacation,” Chicago Tri- bune, September 3, 2012, 4; and S. Toker and M. Biron, “Job Burnout and Depres- sion: Unraveling Their Temporal Relationship and Considering the Role of Physical Activ- ity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 3 (2012): 699–710.

vacation Deficit Disorder an ethical Choice

26 PART 1 Introduction

Coming Attractions: Developing an OB Model We conclude this chapter by presenting a general model that defines the field of OB and stakes out its parameters, concepts, and relationships. By studying the model, you will have a good picture of how the topics in this text can inform your approach to management issues and opportunities.

an overview A model is an abstraction of reality, a simplified representation of some real- world phenomenon. Exhibit 1-5 presents the skeleton of our OB model. It pro- poses three types of variables (inputs, processes, and outcomes) at three levels of analysis (individual, group, and organizational). In the chapters to follow, we will proceed from the individual level (Chapters 2 through 8) to group behav- ior (Chapters 9 through 14) to the organizational system (Chapters 15 through 18). The model illustrates that inputs lead to processes, which lead to outcomes; we will discuss interrelationships at each level of analysis. Notice that the model also shows that outcomes can influence inputs in the future, which highlights the broad-reaching effect OB initiatives can have on an organization’s future.

inputs Inputs are the variables like personality, group structure, and organizational culture that lead to processes. These variables set the stage for what will occur in an organization later. Many are determined in advance of the employment relationship. For example, individual diversity characteristics, personality, and values are shaped by a combination of an individual’s genetic inheritance and childhood environment. Group structure, roles, and team responsibilities are

7 Compare the three levels of analysis in this text’s OB model.

model An abstraction of reality, a simplified representation of some real-world phenomenon.

input variables that lead to processes.

a Basic oB ModelExhibit 1-5

Processes

Individual Level • Emotions and moods • Motivation • Perception • Decision making

Group Level • Communication • Leadership • Power and politics • Conflict and negotiation

Organizational Level • Human resource management • Change practices

Outcomes

Individual Level • Attitudes and stress • Task performance • Citizenship behavior • Withdrawal behavior

Group Level • Group cohesion • Group functioning

Organizational Level • Productivity • Survival

Inputs

Individual Level • Diversity • Personality • Values

Group Level • Group structure • Group roles • Team responsibilities

Organizational Level • Structure • Culture

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 27

typically assigned immediately before or after a group is formed. Finally, organi- zational structure and culture are usually the result of years of development and change as the organization adapts to its environment and builds up customs and norms.

Processes If inputs are like the nouns in OB, processes are like verbs. Processes are actions that individuals, groups, and organizations engage in as a result of inputs and that lead to certain outcomes. At the individual level, processes include emo- tions and moods, motivation, perception, and decision making. At the group level, they include communication, leadership, power and politics, and conflict and negotiation. Finally, at the organizational level, processes include human resource management and change practices.

outcomes Outcomes are the key variables that you want to explain or predict, and that are affected by some other variables. What are the primary outcomes in OB? Schol- ars have emphasized individual-level outcomes, such as attitudes and stress, task performance, citizenship behavior, and withdrawal behavior. At the group level, cohesion and functioning are the dependent variables. Finally, at the organiza- tional level, we look at overall productivity and survival. Because these outcomes will be covered in all the chapters, we’ll briefly discuss each here so you can understand what the goal of OB will be.

attitudes and Stress Employee attitudes are the evaluations employees make, ranging from positive to negative, about objects, people, or events. For exam- ple, the statement “I really think my job is great” is a positive job attitude, and “My job is boring and tedious” is a negative job attitude. Stress is an unpleasant psychological process that occurs in response to environmental pressures.

Some people might think influencing employee attitudes and stress is purely soft stuff and not the business of serious managers, but as we will show, attitudes often have behavioral consequences that directly relate to organizational effec- tiveness. The belief that satisfied employees are more productive than dissatis- fied employees has been a basic tenet among managers for years, though only now has research begun to support it. Ample evidence shows that employees who are more satisfied and treated fairly are more willing to engage in the above-and- beyond citizenship behavior so vital in the contemporary business environment.

task Performance The combination of effectiveness and efficiency at doing your core job tasks is a reflection of your level of task performance. If we think about the job of a factory worker, task performance could be measured by the number and quality of products produced in an hour. The task performance of a teacher would be the level of education that students obtain. The task perfor- mance of consultants might be the timeliness and quality of the presentations they offer to the client. All these types of performance relate to the core duties and responsibilities of a job and are often directly related to the functions listed on a formal job description.

Obviously task performance is the most important human output contribut- ing to organizational effectiveness, so in every chapter we devote considerable time to detailing how task performance is affected by the topic in question.

organizational Citizenship Behavior (oCB) The discretionary behavior that is not part of an employee’s formal job requirements, and that contributes to the

processes Actions that individuals, groups, and organizations engage in as a result of inputs and that lead to certain outcomes.

outcomes Key factors that are affected by some other variables.

stress An unpleasant psychological process that occurs in response to environmental pressures.

task performance The combination of effectiveness and efficiency at doing core job tasks.

28 PART 1 Introduction

psychological and social environment of the workplace, is called organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), or simply citizenship behavior. Successful organiza- tions have employees who will do more than their usual job duties—who will provide performance beyond expectations. In today’s dynamic workplace, where tasks are increasingly performed by teams and flexibility is critical, employees who engage in “good citizenship” behaviors help others on their team, volun- teer for extra work, avoid unnecessary conflicts, respect the spirit as well as the letter of rules and regulations, and gracefully tolerate occasional work-related impositions and nuisances.

Organizations want and need employees who will do things that aren’t in any job description. Evidence indicates organizations that have such employees out- perform those that don’t. As a result, OB is concerned with citizenship behavior as an outcome variable.

Withdrawal Behavior We’ve already mentioned behavior that goes above and beyond task requirements, but what about behavior that in some way is below task requirements? Withdrawal behavior is the set of actions that employees take to separate themselves from the organization. There are many forms of withdrawal, ranging from showing up late or failing to attend meetings to ab- senteeism and turnover.

Employee withdrawal can have a very negative effect on an organization. The cost of employee turnover alone has been estimated to run into the thousands of dollars, even for entry-level positions. Absenteeism also costs organizations significant amounts of money and time every year. For instance, a recent survey found the average direct cost to U.S. employers of unscheduled absences is 8.7 percent of payroll.60 And in Sweden, an average of 10 percent of the country’s workforce is on sick leave at any given time.61

It’s obviously difficult for an organization to operate smoothly and attain its objectives if employees fail to report to their jobs. The workflow is disrupted, and important decisions may be delayed. In organizations that rely heavily on assembly-line production, absenteeism can be considerably more than a dis- ruption; it can drastically reduce the quality of output or even shut down the

organizational citizenship behavior (OcB) Discretionary behavior that contributes to the psychological and social environment of the workplace.

withdrawal behavior The set of actions employees take to separate themselves from the organization.

These employees of W. L. Gore & Associates engage in good citizenship behavior, one of the primary individual-level outcomes in organizational behavior. Working in teams, these employees perform beyond expectations in helping each other, recognizing their peers, and doing more than their usual job responsibilities. Source: PRNewsFoto/W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc/

AP images

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 29

facility. Levels of absenteeism beyond the normal range have a direct impact on any organization’s effectiveness and efficiency. A high rate of turnover can also disrupt the efficient running of an organization when knowledgeable and expe- rienced personnel leave and replacements must be found to assume positions of responsibility. Research indicates that, in general, turnover is significantly harmful for organizational performance.62

All organizations have some turnover, of course. Turnover rates vary greatly by country and, in part, reflect the economy of that country. The U.S. national turnover rate in 2014 averaged about 40 percent; often the average is around 3 percent per month.63 Is this good or bad? To answer that question, we need to know why there is turnover. Turnover includes voluntary terminations by the employee (quitting), involuntary terminations by the employer without cause (layoffs and discharges), and other separations including involuntary termi- nations with cause (firing). The yearly average for quitting in 2014 was about 20 percent; layoffs and discharges averaged about 14 percent; and other separa- tions averaged about 4 percent for the year. Therefore, about half the turnover

I got fired! When prospective employers find out, they’ll never hire me. Is there anything I can say to turn this around?

— Matt Dear Matt: Under this dark cloud, there are some sil- ver linings: 1) firing, or involuntary termi- nation, happens to just about everyone at least once in a career; and 2) there is a worldwide job shortage of skilled work- ers. You might be amazed to know that historically, individuals have changed jobs an average of 11 times over their early careers (from age 18 to 44). In fact, you can probably expect to stay in a job for less than three years, which means you’ll have a lot of jobs in your lifetime.

Therefore, you shouldn’t feel hope- less; you are likely to find your next job soon. ManpowerGroup’s recent survey of over 37,000 employers in 42 coun- tries found that 36 percent of organiza- tions have talent shortages, the high- est percentage in 7 years.

Still, we know you are worried about how to present the facts of your involuntary termination to prospective employers. If you give a truthful, brief account of the reason for your termi- nation, you can position yourself well. Here are some additional suggestions:

• Remember your soft skills count; in fact, they top the lists of employer requirements for all industries. According to Chuck Knebl, a com- munications manager for the job placement company WorkOne, use your résumé and cover letter, interviews, and thank-you notes to showcase your communication skills. Employers report they are also looking for a teamwork atti- tude, positivity, personal responsi- bility, and punctuality, so use every opportunity to demonstrate these traits.

• Although your soft skills count, don’t forget your technical skills; employ- ers agree they are equally important. Knebl advises you to use your ré- sumé to list your technical abilities and be prepared to elaborate upon request. Need some more skills? Job training has been shown to be helpful and can sometimes be free through colleges and unemployment offices.

• Emphasize your ongoing training and education, especially as they relate to new technology; top performers are known to be continuous learners. Also, if you’ve kept up with recent

trends in social media, show it, but don’t go on about your friend’s tweet to Rihanna.

Best wishes for your success!

Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor, Employment Projections, http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_ chart_001.htm; G. Jones, “How the Best Get Better and Better,” Harvard Business Re- view (June 2008): 123–27; ManpowerGroup, “The Talent Shortage Continues/2014,” http://www.manpowergroup.com/wps/ wcm/connect/0b882c15-38bf-41f3-8882- 44c33d0e2952/2014_ Talent_Shortage_ WP_US2.pdf?MOD=AJPERES; J. Meister, “Job Hopping Is the ‘New Normal’ for Mil- lennials: Three Ways to Prevent a Human Resource Nightmare,” Forbes (August 14, 2012), http://www.forbes.com/sites/ jeannemeister/2012/08/14/job-hopping- is-the-new-normal-for-millennials-three-ways- to-prevent-a-human-resource-nightmare/; and N. Schulz, “Hard Unemployment Truths about ‘Soft’ Skills,” The Wall Street Journal, September 19, 2012, A15.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

What do i say about my termination? Career oBjectives

30 PART 1 Introduction

was due to employees quitting their jobs, about 35 percent was due to layoffs and discharges, and the remainder was for other reasons including firings.

While high turnover often impairs an organization’s ability to achieve its goals, quitting is not all bad. In fact, U.S. Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen has discussed the positive aspect of turnover for the economy: People quit because they are optimistic about their outside prospects.64 Moreover, if the “right” people are leaving—the poorer performers—quits can actually be positive for an organization. They can create opportunities to replace under- performing individuals with others who have higher skills or motivation, open up increased opportunities for promotions, and bring new and fresh ideas to the organization. In today’s changing world of work, reasonable levels of employee-initiated turnover improve organizational flexibility and employee independence, and they can lessen the need for management-initiated layoffs. Thus, while it is reasonable to conclude that high turnover often indicates high employee withdrawal (and thus has a negative effect on organizational perfor- mance), zero turnover is not necessarily the goal; and it’s also important for organizations to assess which employees are leaving, and why.

So why do employees withdraw from work through counterproductive behaviors or quitting? As we will show later in the text, reasons include negative job attitudes, emotions, moods, and negative interactions with coworkers and supervisors.

Group Cohesion Although many outcomes in our model can be conceptualized as individual-level phenomena, some relate to the way groups operate. Group cohesion is the extent to which members of a group support and validate one another at work. In other words, a cohesive group is one that sticks together. When employees trust one another, seek common goals, and work together to achieve these common ends, the group is cohesive; when employees are divided among themselves in terms of what they want to achieve and have little loyalty to one another, the group is not cohesive.

There is ample evidence showing that cohesive groups are more effective.65 These results are found both for groups studied in highly controlled laboratory settings and for work teams observed in field settings. This fits with our intuitive sense that people tend to work harder in groups that have a common purpose. Companies attempt to increase cohesion in a variety of ways, ranging from brief icebreaker sessions to social events like picnics, parties, and outdoor adventure- team retreats. Throughout the text we assess whether these specific efforts are likely to result in increases in group cohesiveness. We’ll also consider ways that picking the right people to be on the team in the first place might be an effec- tive way to enhance cohesion.

Group Functioning In the same way that positive job attitudes can be associated with higher levels of task performance, group cohesion should lead to positive group functioning. Group functioning refers to the quantity and quality of a group’s work output. In the same way that the performance of a sports team is more than the sum of individual players’ performance, group functioning in work organizations is more than the sum of individual task performances.

What does it mean to say that a group is functioning effectively? In some organizations, an effective group is one that stays focused on a core task and achieves its ends as specified. Other organizations look for teams that are able to work together collaboratively to provide excellent customer service. Still oth- ers put more of a premium on group creativity and the flexibility to adapt to changing situations. In each case, different types of activities will be required to get the most from the team.

group cohesion The extent to which members of a group support and validate one another while at work.

group functioning The quantity and qual- ity of a group’s work output.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 31

Productivity The highest level of analysis in OB is the organization as a whole. An organization is productive if it achieves its goals by transforming inputs into outputs at the lowest cost. Thus productivity requires both effectiveness and efficiency.

A hospital is effective when it successfully meets the needs of its clientele. It is efficient when it can do so at a low cost. If a hospital manages to achieve higher output from its present staff by reducing the average number of days a patient is confined to bed or increasing the number of staff–patient contacts per day, we say the hospital has gained productive efficiency. A business firm is effective when it attains its sales or market share goals, but its productivity also depends on achiev- ing those goals efficiently. Popular measures of organizational efficiency include return on investment, profit per dollar of sales, and output per hour of labor.

Service organizations must include customer needs and requirements in assessing their effectiveness. Why? Because a clear chain of cause and effect runs from employee attitudes and behavior to customer attitudes and profit- ability. For example, a recent study of six hotels in China indicated that negative employee attitudes decreased customer satisfaction and ultimately harmed the organization’s profitability.66

Survival The final outcome we will consider is organizational survival, which is simply evidence that the organization is able to exist and grow over the long term. The survival of an organization depends not just on how productive the organization is, but also on how well it fits with its environment. A company that is very productively making goods and services of little value to the market is unlikely to survive for long, so survival also relies on perceiving the market suc- cessfully, making good decisions about how and when to pursue opportunities, and successfully managing change to adapt to new business conditions.

Having reviewed the input, process, and outcome model, we’re going to change the figure up a little bit by grouping topics together based on whether we study them at the individual, group, or organizational level. As you can see in Exhibit 1-6, we will deal with inputs, processes, and outcomes at all three

productivity The combination of the effec- tiveness and efficiency of an organization.

effectiveness The degree to which an organization meets the needs of its clientele or customers.

efficiency The degree to which an organi- zation can achieve its ends at a low cost.

organizational survival The degree to which an organization is able to exist and grow over the long term.

the Plan of the textExhibit 1-6

The Group

Inputs • Group structure (Ch. 9 & 10) • Group roles (Ch. 9 & 10) • Team responsibilities (Ch. 9 & 10)

Processes • Communication (Ch. 11) • Leadership (Ch. 12) • Power and politics (Ch. 13) • Conflict and negotiation (Ch. 14)

Outcomes • Group cohesion (Ch. 9 & 10) • Group functioning (Ch. 9 & 10)

The Organization

Inputs • Structure (Ch. 15) • Culture (Ch. 16)

Processes • Human resource management (Ch. 17) • Change practices (Ch. 18)

Outcomes • Productivity (all) • Survival (all)

The Individual

Inputs • Diversity in Organizations (Ch.2) • Personality and Values (Ch. 5)

Processes • Emotions and moods (Ch. 4) • Motivation (Ch. 7 and 8) • Perception and decision making (Ch. 6)

Outcomes • Attitudes (Ch. 3) and stress (Ch. 18) • Task performance (all) • Citizenship behavior (all) • Withdrawal behavior (all)

32 PART 1 Introduction

levels of analysis, but we group the chapters as shown here to correspond with the typical ways research has been done in these areas. For example, it is easier to understand one unified presentation about how personality leads to moti- vation, which leads to performance, than to jump around levels of analysis. Because each level builds on the one that precedes it, after going through them in sequence you will have a good idea of how the human side of organizations functions.

Summary Managers need to develop their interpersonal, or people, skills to be effective in their jobs. Organizational behavior (OB) investigates the impact that indi- viduals, groups, and structure have on behavior within an organization, and it applies that knowledge to make organizations work more effectively.

Implications for Managers ●● Resist the inclination to rely on generalizations; some provide valid in-

sights into human behavior, but many are erroneous. Get to know the person, and understand the context.

●● Use metrics rather than hunches to explain cause-and-effect relationships. ●● Work on your interpersonal skills to increase your leadership potential. ●● Improve your technical skills and conceptual skills through training and

staying current with OB trends like big data. ●● OB can improve your employees’ work quality and productivity by show-

ing you how to empower your employees, design and implement change programs, improve customer service, and help your employees balance work–life conflicts.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 33

the battle of the texts

W alk into your nearest major bookstore and you’ll see shelves of management books whose titles tell us the topics we apparently need to know about: ●● The Secret (Berrett-Koehler, 2014) ●● Turn the Ship Around! (Portfolio, 2013) ●● The Way You Do Anything Is the Way You Do Everything (Wiley,

2014) ●● Leadership Safari (Best Seller, 2014) ●● Business Is a Baby (Amazon Digital Services, 2014) ●● Think Like a Freak (William Morrow, 2014) ●● Spiraling Upward (Amazon Digital Services, 2015) ●● Refire! Don’t Retire (Berrett-Koehler, 2015) ●● Top Dog (Amazon Digital Services, 2015)

Popular books on organizational behavior often have cute titles and are fun to read, but they make the job of managing people seem like it’s just a matter of having a good slogan and five easy steps. If you dig into the texts, you’ll find that most are based on the author’s opinions rather than substantive research. Most become popular, in part, because people largely agree with the opinions they are reading and enjoy the author’s writing style. Often, the writers are presentation speakers or consultants whose real business is in delivering ideas to you. When the author is a veteran from the business world, it is doubtful that one person’s experience translates into an effective management practice for everyone. even when the authors are numbers-oriented, as are the “Freak” authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, their con- clusions for management are not management-research based. So why do we base our own management philosophies on these books when, with a little effort, we can access knowledge produced by thou- sands of scientific studies on human behavior in organizations?

Organizational behavior is a complex subject. Few if any simple statements about human behavior are generalizable to all people in all situations. Would you try to apply leadership insights you got from a book about Star Wars or Breaking Bad to managing software engi- neers in the twenty-first century? Surely not. neither should we try to apply leadership insights that aren’t based on research about the type of workplaces in which we function.

POInt

People want to know about management—the good, the bad, and the ugly. People who have experience or high interest write about the topics that interest readers, and publishers put out the best of these texts. When books become popular, we know people are learning from them and finding good results by applying the au- thor’s management ideas. It’s a good process. Texts like these can pro- vide people with the secrets to management that others have worked out through experience. Isn’t it better to learn about management from people in the trenches, as opposed to the latest obscure references from academia? Many of the most important insights we gain in life aren’t necessarily the product of careful empirical research studies.

“Fluffy” management guides sometimes do get published, and once in a while they become popular. But do they outnumber the esoteric research studies published in scholarly journal articles every year? Far from it; sometimes it seems that for every popular business text, there are thousands of scholarly journal articles. Many of these articles can hardly be read by individuals in the workplace—they are buried in academic libraries, riddled with strange acronyms and “in- sider” terms, and light on practical application. Often they apply to specific management scenarios, so they are even less generalizable. For example, a few recent management and OB studies were pub- lished in 2015 with the following titles:

●● Transferring Management Practices to China: A Bourdieusian Critique of Ethnocentricity

●● Cross-Cultural Perceptions of Clan Control in Korean Multi- national Companies: A Conceptual Investigation of Employ- ees’ Fairness Monitoring Based on Cultural Values

●● The Resistible Rise of Bayesian Thinking in Management: Historical Lessons from Decision Analysis

●● A Model of Rhetorical Legitimation: The Structure of Commu- nication and Cognition Underlying Institutional Maintenance and Change

We don’t mean to poke fun at these studies, but our point is that all ways of creating knowledge can be criticized. If business books can sometimes be “fluffy,” academic articles can be esoteric and even less relevant. Popular books can add to our understanding of how people work and how to best manage them; we shouldn’t assume they are not of value. And while there is no one right way to learn the science and art of managing people in organizations, the most enlightened managers gather insights from multiple sources: their own experience, research findings, observations of others, and, yes, the popular busi- ness press. Authors and academics have an important role to play, and it isn’t fair to condemn business books with catchy titles.

COunterPOInt

34 PART 1 Introduction

chaPter revieW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QuestiOns fOr revieW

1-1 What is the importance of interpersonal skills in the workplace?

1-2 What is the definition of organizational behavior (OB)?

1-3 How does systematic study contribute to our understanding of OB?

1-4 What are the major behavioral science disciplines that contribute to OB?

1-5 Why are there so few absolutes in OB? 1-6 What are the challenges and opportunities for managers in using OB concepts?

1-7 What are the three levels of analysis in our OB model?

exPerientiaL exercise Managing the OB Way Divide the class into groups of approximately four members each. Each group should consider the follow- ing scenario:

You will assume the role of a special committee of district managers at a large pharmaceutical company. Your committee will be meeting to discuss some problems. The process set up by the company is as follows:

1. Each committee member should first review the problem privately and formulate independent ideas for what might be done.

2. At the start of the meeting, each member should spend one minute addressing the group.

During the meeting, the committee must reach a consensus on both the best solution and supporting ratio- nale to each problem. How this is done is entirely up to the committee members, but you must come up with a consensus decision and not a majority opinion achieved by voting.

Here is the problem your committee is to consider:

The company has no specific policy regarding facial hair. Tom, a pharmaceutical sales rep with a little more than a year’s experi- ence and an average (but declining) sales record, has grown a very long and ragged beard that detracts significantly from his appearance. His hobby is playing bass in an amateur bluegrass

band, and he feels that a ragged beard is an important part of the act. Tom says his beard is a personal fashion statement that has to do with his individual freedom.

There have been numerous complaints about Tom’s appearance from both doctors and pharmacists. The manager has talked to him on many occasions about the impact his appearance could have on his sales. Nevertheless, Tom still has the beard.

The manager is concerned about Tom’s decreasing sales as well as the professional image of the sales force in the medical community. Tom says his sales decrease has nothing to do with his beard. However, sales in the other territories in the district are significantly better than they were last year.

When the groups have reached their consensus decisions, the following questions will serve for class discussion:

1-8. What do you think are the concerns for the com- pany regarding Tom’s facial hair? Should they care about his appearance?

1-9. What was your group’s consensus decision regard- ing the issue with Tom’s facial hair?

1-10. Let’s say Tom told you he thinks the beard is part of his personal religion that he is forming. Do you think that announcement would change how you talk to Tom about the issue?

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 35

ethicaL DiLeMMa There’s a Drone in Your Soup It is the year 2020, and drones are everywhere. Alibaba quadcopters have been delivering special ginger tea to customers in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou for years; Amazon’s octocopters finally deliver packages in most major cities within 30 minutes without knocking down pedestrians; and college students everywhere welcome late-night nachos from Taco Bell Tacocopters. Indoor drones are still in the pioneering phase—backyard enthu- siasts are building tiny versions, but no large-scale com- mercial efforts have been put toward indoor utility drones. That’s all about to change.

You work for a multinational technology corporation on a sprawling, 25-acre headquarters campus, with offices in 2 million square feet of interior space in one large build- ing and four additional smaller (but still large) buildings. The official Head of Interior Spaces is your boss; you’re the leader of the Consideration of New Things team. In a meeting with your team, your boss says, “I’ve just heard from my friend at Right To Drones Too (R2D2) that his group has perfected their inside drone. It’s small and light but can carry up to 10 pounds. It includes a camera, a speaker, and a recorder.”

Your team expresses surprise; no one even knew an inside utility drone was under development, and govern- ments worldwide are still haggling over regulations for drones. Your boss goes on enthusiastically, “I’ve seen the little drones, and I think you’ll be impressed—not only can they scoot across the quad, but they can fetch things off tables, grab me a latté, attend meetings for me, check over your shoulders to see what you’re working on … anything!

They’re really accurate, agile, and super quiet, so you’ll barely even know they’re around. My friend wants us to have the first 100 drones here for free, and he’s willing to send them over tomorrow! I figure we can hand them out randomly, although of course we’ll each have one.”

Your boss sits back, smiling and expecting applause. You glance at your team members and are relieved to see doubt and hesitation on their faces.

“Sounds, uh, great,” you reply. “But how about the team takes the afternoon to set the ground rules?”

Questions 1-11. How might the R2D2 drones influence employee

behavior? Do you think they will cause people to act more or less ethically? Why?

1-12. Who should get the drones initially? How can you justify your decision ethically? What restrictions for use should these people be given, and how do you think employees, both those who get drones and those who don’t, will react to this change?

1-13. How will your organization deal with sabotage or misuse of the drones? The value of an R2D2 drone is $2,500.

1-14. Many organizations already use electronic moni- toring of employees, including sifting through website usage and e-mail correspondence, often without the employees’ direct knowledge. In what ways might drone monitoring be better or worse for employees than covert electronic monitoring of Web or e-mail activity?

case inciDent 1 Apple Goes Global It wasn’t long ago that products from Apple, perhaps the most recognizable name in electronics manufacturing around the world, were made entirely in America. This is not the case anymore. Now, almost all of the approximately 70 million iPhones, 30 million iPads, and 59 million other Apple products sold yearly are manufactured overseas. This change represents more than 20,000 jobs directly lost by U.S. workers, not to mention more than 700,000 other jobs given to foreign companies in Asia, Europe, and else- where. The loss is not temporary. As the late Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s iconic co-founder, told President Obama, “Those jobs aren’t coming back.”

At first glance, the transfer of jobs from one workforce to another would seem to hinge on a difference in wages, but Apple shows this is an oversimplification. In fact, some say paying U.S. wages would add only $65 to each iPhone’s expense, while Apple’s profits average hundreds of dollars per phone. Rather, and of more concern, Apple’s leaders

believe the intrinsic characteristics of the labor force avail- able to them in China—which they identify as flexibility, diligence, and industrial skills—are superior to those of the U.S. labor force. Apple executives tell of shorter lead times and faster manufacturing processes in China that are becoming the stuff of company legend. “The speed and flexibility is breathtaking,” one executive said. “There’s no American plant that can match that.” Another said, “We shouldn’t be criticized for using Chinese workers. The U.S. has stopped producing people with the skills we need.”

Because Apple is one of the most imitated companies in the world, this perception of an overseas advantage might suggest that the U.S. workforce needs to be better led, bet- ter trained, more effectively managed, and more motivated to be proactive and flexible. If U.S. (and western Europe- an) workers are less motivated and less adaptable, it’s hard to imagine that does not spell trouble for the future of the American workforce. Perhaps, though, Apple’s switch

36 PART 1 Introduction

from “100 percent Made in the U.S.A.” to “10 percent Made in the U.S.A.” represents the natural growth pat- tern of a company going global. At this point, the iPhone is largely designed in the United States (where Apple has 43,000 employees); parts are made in South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, Europe, and elsewhere; and products are assembled in China. The future of at least 247 suppliers worldwide depends on Apple’s approximately $30.1 billion in orders per quarter. And we can’t forget that Apple posted $16.1 billion in revenue from China in the first quarter of 2015, up 70 percent from the first quarter of 2014, perhaps in part because its manufacturing in China builds support for the brand there.

As maker of some of the most cutting-edge, revered products in the electronics marketplace, perhaps Apple serves not as a failure of one country to hold onto a

company completely, but as one of the best examples of global ingenuity.

Questions 1-15. What are the pros and cons for local and overseas

labor forces of Apple’s going global? What are the potential political implications for country rela- tionships?

1-16. Do you think Apple is justified in drawing the observations and conclusions expressed in the case? Why or why not? Do you think it is good or harmful to the company that its executives have voiced these opinions?

1-17. How could managers use increased worker flexibility and diligence to increase the competitiveness of their manufacturing sites? What would you recommend?

Sources: B. X. Chen, “IPhone Sales in China Bolster Apple Earnings,” The New York Times ( January 27, 2015), http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/technology/apple-quarterly-earnings.html?_r=0; C. Duhigg and K. Bradsher, “How U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work,” The New York Times, January 22, 2013, A1, A22–A23; H. Gao, “How the Apple Confrontation Divides China,” The Atlantic (April 8, 2013), www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/04/how-the-apple-confrontation-divides-china/ 274764/; and A. Satariano, “Apple Slowdown Threatens $30 Billion Global Supplier Web,” Bloom- berg, www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-18/apple-slowdown-threatens-30-billion-global-supplier- web-tech.html.

case inciDent 2 Big Data for Dummies Do you need big data? Maybe the question is better phrased as: Can you afford not to use big data? The age of big data is here, and to ignore its benefits is to run the risk of missed opportunities.

Organizations using big data are quickly reaping re- wards, as a survey of 2,022 managers worldwide indicated recently. In fact, 71 percent of respondents agreed that organizations using big data will gain a “huge competi- tive advantage.” These managers also saw the need for big data: 58 percent responded that they never, rarely, or only sometimes have enough data to make key business deci- sions. Furthermore, they’ve witnessed the benefits: 67 per- cent agreed that big data has helped their organization to innovate. So why did only 28 percent find that their access to useful data significantly increased in a year?

According to Amy Braverman, a principal statistician who analyzes NASA’s spacecraft data, the problem is in interpreting the new kinds and volumes of data we are able to collect. “This opportunistic data collection is lead- ing to entirely new kinds of data that aren’t well suited to the existing statistical and data-mining methodologies,” she said. IT and business leaders agree: in a recent sur- vey, “determining how to get value” was identified as the number 1 challenge of big data.

With strong need combating the high hurdle for usabil- ity, how should a company get started using big data? The

quick answer seems to be to hire talent. But not just any- one will do. Here are some points to ponder when hiring data professionals:

1. Look for candidates with a strong educational back- ground in analytics/statistics. You want someone who knows more than you do about handling copious amounts of data.

2. The ideal candidates will have specific experience in your industry or a related industry. “When you have all those Ph.D.s in a room, magic doesn’t necessarily hap- pen because they may not have the business capability,” said Andy Rusnak, a senior executive at Ernst & Young.

3. Search for potential candidates from industry leader organizations that are more advanced in big data.

4. Communication skills are a must. Look for a candidate “who can translate Ph.D. to English,” says SAP Chief Data Scientist David Ginsberg. He adds, “Those are the hardest people to find.”

5. Find candidates with a proven record of finding use- ful information from a mess of data, including data from questionable sources. You want someone who is analytical and discerning.

6. Look for people who can think in 8- to 10-week periods, not just long term. Most data projects have a short-term focus.

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 37

7. Test candidates’ expertise on real problems. Netflix’s Director of Algorithms asks candidates, “You have this data that comes from our users. How can you use it to solve this particular problem?”

Questions 1-18. Let’s say you work in a metropolitan city for a large

department store chain and your manager puts you in charge of a team to find out whether keep- ing the store open an hour longer each day would

increase profits. What data might be available to your decision-making process? What data would be important to your decision?

1-19. What kinds of data might we want in OB applications?

1-20. As Braverman notes, one problem with big data is making sense of the information. How might a better understanding of psychology help you sift through all this data?

Sources: M. Taes, “If I Could Have More Data…,” The Wall Street Journal, March 24, 2014, R5; S. Thurm, “It’s a Whole New Data Game,” The Wall Street Journal, February 10, 2015, R6; and J. Will- hite, “Getting Started in ‘Big Data’,” The Wall Street Journal, February 4, 2014, B7.

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

1-21. Now that you’ve read the chapter and Case Incident 1, if you were an Apple manager whose employees were losing their jobs to overseas workers, what would you advise your teams to do in order to find re-employment in  their professions? What types of training—basic, technical, interpersonal, problem-solving—would you recommend?

1-22. In relation to Case Incident 2, why do you think it is important to have educated, experienced statisticians on any team that is using big data for decision making? What might be the consequences of hiring someone with less experience?

1-23. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

38 PART 1 Introduction

enDnOtes 1“Survey: Few CFOs Plan to Invest in Interper- sonal Skills Development for Their Teams,” Accountemps press release, June 19, 2013, http://accountemps.rhi.mediaroom.com/ 2013-06-19-Survey-Few-CFOs-Plan-to-Invest-in- Interpersonal-Skills-Development-for-Their- Teams. 2K. Dill, “The 20 Best Places to Work in 2015,” Forbes, December 10, 2014, http://www.forbes .com/sites/kathryndill/2014/12/10/the-best- places-to-work-in-2015/. 3I. S. Fulmer, B. Gerhart, and K. S. Scott, “Are the 100 Best Better? An Empirical Investiga- tion of the Relationship between Being a ‘Great Place to Work’ and Firm Performance,” Personnel Psychology, Winter 2003, 965–93. 4S. E. Humphrey, J. D. Nahrgang, and F. P. Morgeson, “Integrating Motivational, Social, and Contextual Work Design Features: A Meta-Analytic Summary and Theoretical Extension of the Work Design Literature,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 5 (2007): 1332–56. 5E. R. Burris, “The Risks and Rewards of Speaking Up: Managerial Responses to Em- ployee Voice,” Academy of Management Journal 55, no. 4 (2012): 851–75. 6T. L. Miller, C. L. Wesley II, and D. E. Williams, “Educating the Minds of Caring Hearts: Comparing the Views of Practitioners and Educators on the Importance of Social Entrepreneurship Competencies,” Academy of Management Learning & Education 2, no. 3 (2012): 349–70. 7H. Aguinis and A. Glavas, “What We Don’t Know about Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda,” Journal of Management, July 2012, 932–68. 8D. Meinert, “Background on Bosses,” HR Magazine, August 2014, 29. 9Ibid. 10Ibid. 11A. I. Kraut, P. R. Pedigo, D. D. McKenna, and M. D. Dunnette, “The Role of the Man- ager: What’s Really Important in Different Management Jobs,” Academy of Management Executive 19, no. 4 (2005): 122–29. 12C. Matheson, “Understanding the Policy Process: The Work of Henry Mintzberg,” Public Administration Review 69 (2009): 1148–61; S. Segal, “A Heideggerian Perspec- tive on the Relationship between Mintzberg’s Distinction between Engaged and Discon- nected Management: The Role of Uncer- tainty in Management,” Journal of Business Ethics 103 (2011): 469–83; H. Mintzberg, “Productivity is Killing American Enter- prise,” Harvard Business Review 85 (2007): 25; and H. Mintzberg, “Rebuilding Companies as Communities,” Harvard Business Review 87 (2009): 140–43. 13Ibid. 14D. Bartram, “The Great Eight Compe- tencies: A Criterion-Centric Approach to

Validation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 90, no. 6 (2005): 1185–1203; and S. E. Scullen, M. K. Mount, and T. A. Judge, “Evidence of the Construct Validity of Developmental Ratings of Managerial Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 1 (2003): 50–66. 15For the original study, see F. Luthans, “Suc- cessful vs. Effective Real Managers,” Academy of Management Executive, May 1988, 127–32. A great deal of research has been built by Fred Luthans and others from this study. See, for example, F. Shipper and J. Davy, “A Model and Investigation of Managerial Skills, Employees’ Attitudes, and Managerial Performance,” Leadership Quarterly 13 (2002): 95–120. 16P. Wu, M. Foo, and D. B. Turban, “The Role of Personality in Relationship Closeness, Developer Assistance, and Career Success,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 73, no. 3 (2008): 440–48; and A. M. Konrad, R. Kashlak, I. Yo- shioka, R. Waryszak, and N. Toren, “What Do Managers Like to Do? A Five-Country Study,” Group & Organization Management, December 2001, 401–33. 17L. Dragoni, H. Park, J. Soltis, and S. Forte- Trammell, “Show and Tell: How Supervisors Facilitate Leader Development Among Tran- sitioning Leaders,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 1 (2014): 66-86. 18For a review of what one researcher believes should be included in organizational behav- ior, based on survey data, see J. B. Miner, “The Rated Importance, Scientific Validity, and Practical Usefulness of Organizational Behavior Theories: A Quantitative Review,” Academy of Management Learning & Education, September 2003, 250–68. 19D. M. Rousseau, The Oxford Handbook of Evidence-Based Management (Oxford Library of Psychology) (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014). 20J. Surowiecki, “The Fatal-Flaw Myth,” The New Yorker, July 31, 2006, 25. 21Z. Karabell, “Everyone Has a Data Point,” The Wall Street Journal, February 19, 2014, A11. 22E. Morozov, “Every Little Byte Counts,” The New York Times Book Review, May 18, 2014, 23. 23M. Taves, “If I Could Have More Data…,” The Wall Street Journal, March 24, 2014, R5. 24E. Gamerman, “When the Art is Watching You,” The Wall Street Journal, December 12, 2014, D1–D2. 25V. Monga, “What Is All That Data Worth?” The Wall Street Journal, October 13, 2014, B3, B6. 26E. Dwoskin and Y. Koh, “Twitter Pushes Deeper into Data,” The Wall Street Journal, April 16, 2014, B2. 27“What Will Transform the Way People Work?” HR Magazine, December 2014, 16. 28N. Bloom, R. Sadun, and J. Van Reenan, “How Three Essential Practices Can Address Even the Most Complex Global Practices,”

Harvard Business Review, November 2012, 77–82. 29C. Cole, “Changing Neurobiology with Be- havior,” Association for Psychological Science Observer 27, no. 6 (2014): 29–32. 30E. Dwoskin, “Big Data Knows When You Turn off the Lights,” The Wall Street Journal, October 21, 2014, B1–B2. 31S. Lohr, “Unblinking Eyes Track Employees,” The New York Times, June 22, 2014, 1, 15. 32D. B. Bhave, “The Invisible Eye? Electronic Performance Monitoring and Employee Job Performance,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2003): 605–35. 33R. Karlgaard, “Danger Lurking: Taylor’s Ghost,” Forbes, May 26, 2014, 34. 34E. Dwoskin, “Big Data Knows When You Turn off the Lights.” 35W. Isaacson, “Of Man and Machine,” The Wall Street Journal, September 27–28, 2015, C1–C2. 36V. Morozov, “Every Little Byte Counts.” 37J. Farrar, “U.S. Minimum Wage—Compare It to the Rest of the World,” (January 29, 2014), Worldcrunch, http://www.worldcrunch .com/eyes-on-the-u.s./u.s.-minimum-wage- compare-it-to-the-rest-of-world/state-of- the-union-minimum-wage-workers-labor/ c5s14866/#.VQBdd_nF9uk, accessed March 11, 2015. 38C. Karmin and S. Chaturvedi, “Grosvenor House Is Seized,” The Wall Street Journal, March 4, 2015, C8. 39V. McGrane, “The Downside of Lower Unemployment,” The Wall Street Journal, February 3, 2014, A2. 40A. Lowrey, “Long Out of Work, and Running Out of Options,” The New York Times, April 4, 2014, B1, B4. 41L. Weber and R. E. Silverman, “On-Demand Workers: ‘We Are Not Robots,’” The Wall Street Journal, January 28, 2015, B1, B7. 42C. Porter and M. Korn, “Can This Online Course Get Me a Job?” The Wall Street Journal, March 4, 2014, B7. 43D. Belkin and M. Peters, “For New Grads, Path to a Career is Bumpy,” The Wall Street Journal, May 24–25, 2014, A5. 44N. Kitsantonis, “A Hands-On Approach to the Greek Economy,” The New York Times, March 25, 2014, B3. 45G. Naik, “Global Life Expectancy Rises by Six Years,” The Wall Street Journal, December 18, 2014, A10. 46I. O. Karpen, “Service-Dominant Orienta- tion: Measurement and Impact on Perfor- mance Outcomes,” Journal of Retailing 91, no. 1 (2015): 89–108. 47J. Greenwald, “Tips for Dealing with Employees Whose Social Media Posts Reflect Badly on Your Company,” Forbes, March 6, 2015, www.forbes.com/sites/ entrepreneursorganization/2015/03/06/

What Is Organizational Behavior? CHAPTER 1 39

tips-for-dealing-with-employees-whose-social- media-posts-reflect-badly-on-your-company/. 48E. Jaffe, “Using Technology to Scale the Scientific Mountain,” Association for Psy- chological Science Observer 27, no. 6 (2014): 17–19. 49N. Fallon, “No Face Time? No Problem: How to Keep Virtual Workers Engaged,” Business News Daily, October 2, 2014, http:// www.businessnewsdaily.com/7228-engaging- remote-employees.html. 50E. J. Hirst, “Burnout on the Rise,” Chicago Tribune, October 19, 2012, http://articles .chicagotribune.com/2012-10-29/business/ ct-biz-1029-employee-burnout-20121029_1_ employee-burnout-herbert-freudenberger- employee-stress. 51S. Shellenbarger, “Single and off the Fast Track,” The Wall Street Journal, May 23, 2012, D1, D3. 52M. Mithel, “What Women Want,” Business Today, March 8, 2013, http://businesstoday .intoday.in/story/careers-work-life-balance- women/1/193135.html. 53F. Luthans and C. M. Youssef, “Emerging Positive Organizational Behavior,” Journal of Management, June 2007, 321–49; C. M. Youssef and F. Luthans, “Positive Organi- zational Behavior in the Workplace: The Impact of Hope, Optimism, and Resilience,” Journal of Management 33, no. 5 (2007): 774–800; and J. E. Dutton and S. Sonen- shein, “Positive Organizational Scholarship,” in C. Cooper and J. Barling (eds.), Encyclo-

pedia of Positive Psychology (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2007). 54L. M. Roberts, G. Spreitzer, J. Dutton, R. Quinn, E. Heaphy, and B. Barker, “How to Play to Your Strengths,” Harvard Business Re- view, January 2005, 1–6; and L. M. Roberts, J. E. Dutton, G. M. Spreitzer, E. D. Heaphy, and R. E. Quinn, “Composing the Reflected Best Self-Portrait: Becoming Extraordinary in Work Organizations,” Academy of Management Review 30, no. 4 (2005): 712–36. 55“Five Jobs That Won’t Exist in 10 Years… And One New Title You’ll Start to See,” HR Magazine, February 2014, 16. 56Editorial Board, “NCAA Should Punish the University of North Carolina for Cheating Scandal,” Chicago Tribune, November 7, 2014, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ opinion/editorials/ct-north-carolina-sports- scandal-edit-1108-20141107-story.html, accessed March 11, 2015. 57W. Bailey and A. Spicer, “When Does National Identity Matter? Convergence and Divergence in International Business Eth- ics,” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 6 (2007): 1462–80; and A. B. Oumlil and J. L. Balloun, “Ethical Decision-Making Differences between American and Moroccan Manag- ers,” Journal of Business Ethics 84, no. 4 (2009): 457–78. 58D. M. Mayer, M. Kuenzi, R. Greenbaum, M. Bardes, and R. Salvador, “How Low Does Ethical Leadership Flow? Test of a Trickle-Down Model,” Organizational Behavior and Human

Decision Processes 108, no. 1 (2009): 1–13; and A. Ardichvili, J. A. Mitchell, and D. Jondle, “Char- acteristics of Ethical Business Cultures,” Journal of Business Ethics 85, no. 4 (2009): 445–51. 59D. Meinert, “Managers’ Influence,” HR Maga- zine, April 2014, 25. 60“Unplanned Absence Costs Organizations 8.7 Percent of Payroll, Mercer/Kronos Study” (June 28, 2010), www.mercer.com/press- releases/1383785. 61W. Hoge, “Sweden’s Cradle-to-Grave Welfare Starts to Get Ill,” International Herald Tribune, September 25, 2002, 8. 62T.-Y. Park and J. D. Shaw, “Turnover Rates and Organizational Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98 (2013): 268–309. 63“Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey/2014 Revised,” www.bls.gov, http:// www.bls.gov/jlt/revisiontables.htm, accessed March 13, 2015. 64N. Shah, “Good Sign for Jobs: Less Caution, More Quitting,” The Wall Street Journal, Febru- ary 10, 2014, A2. 65M. Casey-Campbell and M. L. Martens, “Sticking It All Together: A Critical Assess- ment of the Group Cohesion-Performance Literature,” International Journal of Management Reviews 11 (2008): 223–46. 66X. Zhao and A. S. Mattila, “Examining the Spillover Effect of Frontline Employees’ Work-Family Conflict on Their Affective Work Attitudes and Customer Satisfaction,” International Journal of Hospitality Manage- ment, June 2013, 310–15.

S ou

rc e:

J oh

n S

ch ul

tz /Q

ua d-

C ity

T im

es /Z

U M

AP R

ES S

/A la

m y

Diversity in  Organizations2

40

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 41

Exploiting a loopholE

Welcome to Atalissa, Iowa, a quintessential small town of 311 people—and a nasty secret. If you’ve seen this picture before, you are probably aware that what happened in this converted schoolhouse is the basis of

the largest U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(EEOC) award in history.

The tale of the Atalissa bunkhouse begins in 1974, when

Henry’s Turkey Service of Texas rented the abandoned building near its Iowa processing plant to house its workers, a group

of young, mentally disabled men taken from state institutions.

At the time, the unregulated work-to-live arrangement that pro-

vided the men with an average of only $65 per month for full-

time employment was completely legal. Why? A section of the

Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 allowed certified for-profit employers to pay less than minimum wage to workers with

disabilities. Furthermore, the company legally deducted mon-

ey from the men’s meager earnings and their Social Security

checks to cover room, board, and “extras” like medical care,

since the workers didn’t have health insurance or Medicaid.

At the plant, the men were assigned the worst jobs of manually eviscerat-

ing 20,000 turkeys per day. The work was back-breaking and “too bloody,”

said Billy Penner, who awoke at 3 a.m. for decades to work alongside the hundreds of men who came and went from the bunkhouse.

Conditions in the bunkhouse were horrible, with no heat, covered win-

dows and padlocked doors, cockroaches, and filth. Two “caretakers” doled

2-1 Describe the two major forms of workplace diversity.

2-2 Demonstrate how workplace discrimination undermines organizational effectiveness.

2-3 Describe how the key biographical characteristics are relevant to OB.

2-4 Explain how other differentiating characteristics factor into OB.

2-5 Demonstrate the relevance of intellectual and physical abilities to OB.

2-6 Describe how organizations manage diversity effectively.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

42 PART 2 The Individual

out punishments that included standing with hands on a pole for hours and

walking in circles while carrying heavy weights. Men were sometimes hand-

cuffed to their beds overnight, denied bathroom breaks, kicked in the groin,

and verbally abused. Men who ran away were caught and brought back.

Through the years, allegations about Henry’s Turkey Service made their way

into the legal system. They cited the poor treatment of workers; violation of the

federal Migrant and Seasonal Worker Protection Act; harsh labor that killed an elderly, disabled worker; pay inequity; deplorable conditions; and fire hazards.

However, the Iowa Department of Human Services, the U.S. Department of

Labor, Iowa Workforce Development, and the Department of Inspections and

Appeals dismissed most of the allegations without investigation. None of the

departments ever questioned whether the indentured servitude was legal.

Finally, in 2009, a worker’s sister alerted a newspaper reporter, and in-

vestigators rescued the 21 remaining men. A number of lawsuits followed,

resulting in the largest verdict ever obtained by the EEOC and the largest

verdict relating to the Americans with Disabilities Act, over $240 million (the business was worth only $4 million, though). No amount of money

can restore the men to health or well-being. EEOC attorney Robert Canino

referenced their “broken hearts, broken spirits, shattered dreams and, ulti-

mately, their broken lives.”

EEOC chairwoman Jacqueline Berrien said, “The verdict sends an im-

portant message that the conduct that occurred here is intolerable in this

nation.” But does it? After all, the people of Atalissa knew the men well. The workers attended Atalissa Zion Lutheran Church, sang in the choir, joined in

town celebrations, and spent their money at the mini mart. Atalissa owned

the bunkhouse Henry’s Turkey rented; the men were known by the mayor

and the sheriff. And the town claimed to love them. Carol O’Neill of the Atal-

issa Betterment Committee said, “Even though they were adult men, they

were boys to us. They were like—our boys.” Sadly, these men were not ex-

tended protection, and their rights were repeatedly ignored and dismissed.

The Atalissa scandal serves as a reminder that true fairness is not just a

warm feeling toward the disabled, but the ethical responsibility of us all.

Sources: Atalissa Population, https://suburbanstats.org/population/iowa/how-many-people- live-in-atalissa, accessed March 24, 2015; K. Allemeier, “How 21 Men Lived in Atalissa Bunkhouse,” The WCF Courier (February 12, 2009), http://wcfcourier.com/news/local/how- men-lived-in-atalissa-bunkhouse/article_0d1867dc-c722-54f4-97e3-8b0d5e73e587.html; K. Bracken, “The ‘Boys’ in the Bunkhouse,” The New York Times (March 9, 2014), http:// www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/03/09/us/the-boys-in-the-bunkhouse.html; C. Kauff- man, “Jury: $240 Million for Atalissa Workers,” Des Moines Register (May 1, 2013), http:// archive.desmoinesregister.com/article/20130501/NEWS/305010095/Jury-240-million- Atalissa-workers; and C. Kauffman, “Witness: Disabled Workers Physically Abused,” Des Moines Register (April 25, 2013), http://archive.desmoinesregister.com/article/20130425/ NEWS/304240092/Witness-Disabled-workers-physically-abused.

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 43

The exploitation of the disabled men in the opening story is a tragic ex-ample of mistreating people for the ways in which they are different. Not only were the men abused by their supposed caretakers, but they also suffered workplace discrimination that kept them in debilitating roles without regard to their abilities and needs. In this chapter, we look at how organizations should work to maximize the potential contributions of a diverse workforce. Because each of us is different from others in myriad ways, we consider diversity in many different forms. We also show how individual differences in abilities affect em- ployee behavior and effectiveness in organizations.

Diversity We are, each of us, unique. This is obvious enough, but managers sometimes forget they need to recognize and capitalize on individual differences to get the most from their employees. In this chapter, we’ll learn how individual charac- teristics like age, gender, race, ethnicity, and abilities can influence employee performance. We’ll also see how managers can develop awareness about these characteristics and manage a diverse workforce effectively. But first, let’s take an overview perspective of the changing workforce.

Demographic Characteristics The predominantly white, male managerial workforce of the past has given way to a gender-balanced, multiethnic workforce. For instance, in 1950 only 29.6 percent of the U.S. workforce was female,1 but by 2014, women comprised 47 percent.2 Both in the United States and internationally, women today are much more likely than before to be employed full time, have an advanced education, and earn wages comparable to those of men (see the OB Poll).3 In addition, the earnings gap between whites and other racial and ethnic groups in the United States has decreased significantly, partially due to the rising number of minori- ties in the workforce. Hispanics will grow from 13 percent of the workforce in 2014 to 25.1 percent in 2044, blacks will increase from 12 to 12.7 percent, and

2-1 Describe the two major forms of workplace diversity.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2013.pdf.

gender Pay gap: narrowing but still there Ob POLL

Men Women

Approximate median weekly pay per occupation

$1,811

$1,124

$1,549

$1,064

$1,240

$2,266

$1,658

$1,769

$1,518

$1,536

$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500

Chief executives

Marketing and sales managers

Computer and information systems managers

Financial managers

Human resource managers

44 PART 2 The Individual

Asians from 5 to 7.9 percent.4 Workers over the age of 55 are an increasingly large portion of the workforce as well, both in the United States and globally. In the United States, the 55-and-older age group will increase from 19.5 percent of the labor force in 2010 to 25.2 percent by 2020.5 Currently, in Australia there are more workers over age 55 than under age 25, and that shift is set to continue.6 These changes are increasingly reflected in the makeup of manage- rial and professional jobs. These changes also mean organizations must make diversity management a central component of their policies and practices.

levels of Diversity Although much has been said about diversity in age, race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and disability status, experts now recognize that these demographic characteristics are just the tip of the iceberg.7 Demographics mostly reflect surface-level diversity, not thoughts and feelings, and can lead employees to perceive one another through stereotypes and assumptions. However, evidence has shown that people are less concerned about demographic differences if they see themselves as sharing more important characteristics, such as personal- ity and values, that represent deep-level diversity.8

To understand the difference between surface- and deep-level diversity, consider an example. Luis and Carol are managers who seem to have little in common. Luis is a young, recently hired male from a Spanish-speaking neighborhood in Miami with a business degree. Carol is an older woman from rural Kansas who started as a customer service trainee after high school and worked her way up the hierarchy. At first, these coworkers may notice their surface-level differences in education, ethnicity, regional background, and gender. However, as they get to know one another, they may find they are both deeply committed to their families, share a common way of thinking about important work problems, like to work collaboratively, and are interested in international assignments. These deep-level similarities can overshadow the more superficial differences between them, and research suggests they will work well together.

Target store manager Jerald Bryant (center) motivating his team reflects demographic traits of today’s workforce. By making diversity management a central part of its policies and practices, Target has created a gender-balanced, multiethnic, and inclusive workplace. Sources: Lexington Herald-Leader/ZUMAPRESS/Alamy

deep-level diversity Differences in values, personality, and work preferences that become progressively more important for determining similarity as people get to know one another better.

surface-level diversity Differences in easily perceived characteristics, such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, or disability, that do not necessarily reflect the ways people think or feel but that may activate certain stereotypes.

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 45

Throughout this text, we will encounter differences between deep- and surface-level diversity in various contexts. Diversity is an important concept in OB since individual differences shape preferences for rewards, communication styles, reactions to leaders, negotiation styles, and many other aspects of behav- ior in organizations. Unfortunately, increased diversity may also mean increases in discriminatory practices, which we will discuss next.

Discrimination Although diversity presents many opportunities for organizations, diversity man- agement includes working to eliminate unfair discrimination. To discriminate is to note a difference between things, which in itself isn’t necessarily bad. Notic- ing one employee is more qualified is necessary for making hiring decisions;

2-2 Demonstrate how workplace discrimination undermines organizational effectiveness.

discrimination Noting of a difference between things; often we refer to unfair discrimination, which means making judg- ments about individuals based on stereotypes regarding their demographic group.

Unemployed veterans, take heart: Walmart wants YOU. In a historic move, the retailing giant vowed to hire any returning U.S. veteran who applied. As a result, the company hired more than 42,000 veterans by mid- 2014 and expects that total to reach 100,000 by 2018. Other businesses have launched similar initiatives, such as the 100,000 Jobs Mission, which aimed to hire 100,000 veterans by 2020. The coalition, which originally included 11 companies, now consists of 190 companies from nearly every industry. As of 2015, 217,000 veterans had been hired, prompting the coalition to commit to hiring another 100,000 veterans. Is this an ethical choice all businesses should be emulating?

Few people would disagree that there is a need to address the plight of returning soldiers to America. Many veterans say employers don’t want them. “There are a lot of companies that say they want veterans, but that conflicts with the unemployment num- bers,” claims Hakan Jackson, a former technician in the Air Force. He’s right: Unemployment rates remain higher for veterans than civilians.

According to some veterans, the returning soldiers are not competitive

enough in the marketplace. Erik Sewell, an Iraq war veteran, suggested the rea- son the veteran unemployment rate is poor is partly that vets often don’t mar- ket their strengths well or showcase their transferable skills to potential em- ployers. Bryson DeTrent, a 12-year vet- eran of the National Guard, observed that one of the key reasons some vets haven’t found jobs is that they aren’t working hard at it, preferring to col- lect unemployment instead. However, he has also found that companies are reluctant to hire veterans, especially National Guard members, fearing these employees may later be called to duty. Mental and emotional well-being are also a concern as employers may worry that veterans suffer from post-trau- matic stress disorder (PTSD). Despite concerns, some managers report that veterans’ work ethic, team outlook, and receptivity to training are greater than among the general populace.

Sometimes, affirmative action is needed to give an unfairly disadvan- taged workforce segment an oppor- tunity to succeed, whether it is done through percentage quotas, number quotas, or hiring all prospective employ- ees from the desired groups. But any program risks including underqualified

individuals from the target group while excluding qualified individuals from other workforce segments. This might mean hiring an underqualified veteran instead of a well-qualified civilian.

Resources are always scarce, and there are only so many jobs to go around. Managers must balance the ethics of affirmative action against the responsibility of strengthening their workforces for the good of their organizations.

Sources: “100,000 Jobs Mission Hires Over 200,000 Veterans,” Veteran Jobs Mission press release (February 9, 2015), https:// www.veteranjobsmission.com/press- releases/750; D. C. Baldridge and M. L. Swift, “Withholding Requests for Disability Accommodation: The Role of Individual Dif- ferences and Disability Attributes,” Journal of Management (March 2013): 743–62; “Walmart Celebrates More Than 40,000 Hires in First Year of Veterans Commit- ment,” Walmart Foundation press release (May 21, 2014), http://news.walmart. com/news-archive/2014/05/21/walmart- celebrates-more-than-40-000-hires-in-first- year-of-veterans-commitment; B. Yerbak and C. V. Jackson, “Battling to Get More Vets in the Work Force,” Chicago Tribune (October 28, 2012), http://articles.chicagotribune. com/2012-10-28/business/ct-biz-1028- vets-20121028_1_train-veterans-unem- ployment-rate-war-zone; and “Veterans Un- employment Drops but Remains High,” HR Magazine, February 2013, 16.

affirmative action for Unemployed veterans an Ethical Choice

46 PART 2 The Individual

noticing another is taking on leadership responsibilities exceptionally well is necessary for making promotion decisions. Usually when we talk about discrimi- nation, though, we mean allowing our behavior to be influenced by stereotypes about groups of people. Stereotyping is judging someone on the basis of our perception of the group to which that person belongs. To use a machine meta- phor, you might think of stereotypes as the fuel that powers the discrimination engine. Stereotypes can be insidious not only because they may affect the perpe- trators of discrimination, but also because they can affect how potential targets of discrimination see themselves.

Stereotype threat Let’s say you are sitting in a restaurant, waiting for the blind date your coworker arranged to find you in the crowded room. How do you think your coworker described you to this person? Now consider how you would describe yourself to this new person if you’d talked on the phone before the date. What identifiable groups would you mention as a shorthand way for your date to know a bit about you so he or she could recognize you in the restaurant?

Chances are good that you’d mention your race, something about how you express your gender (such as the way you dress), how old you are, and maybe what you do for a living. You might also mention how tall you are if you are remarkably tall or short, and—if you’re candid—you might mention something about your build (heavyset, petite, in between). Overall, you’d give cues to your blind date about characteristics that are distinctive, or stand out, about you. Interestingly, what you tell someone about yourself says a lot about what you think about yourself. Just as we stereotype others, we also stereotype ourselves.

Stereotype threat describes the degree to which we internally agree with the generally negative stereotyped perceptions of our groups. Along with that comes a fear of being judged when we are identified with the negative connota- tions of that group. This can happen when we are a minority in a situation. For instance, an older worker applying for a job in a predominately Millennial-age workforce may assume the interviewer thinks he is out of touch with current trends. What creates a stereotype threat is not whether the worker is or is not up to date with trends, but whether he internally agrees that older workers (the group he identifies with) are out of date (the stereotype).

People become their own worst enemies when they feel a stereotype threat. Ironically, they may unconsciously exaggerate the stereotype, like an older job applicant who talks about aging, rambles during the conversation, and discloses too much.9 Second, they may over-identify with the stereotype. For example, studies of unemployed and underemployed workers have suggested they experi- ence the stereotyped identity of nonworkers as lazy and aimless. Even when re- employed, they often retain the stereotype threat of their earlier status.10 Third, people may over-compensate for the stereotype threat they feel. A Hispanic who tries to be as busy as possible at work and rushes conspicuously around the office may be attempting to overcome a stereotype threat of Hispanics as slower work- ers. This may happen even if the workplace has many ethnic minority employ- ees, since minorities perceive stereotypes about each other.11 Lastly, people may perform differently when reminded of their stereotyped group. For instance, older adults may not perform as well on memory tests when they are reminded beforehand of their older status, evoking stereotype threat.12

Stereotype threat has serious implications for the workplace. Employees who feel it may have lower performance, lower satisfaction, negative job atti- tudes, decreased engagement, decreased motivation, higher absenteeism, more health issues, and higher turnover intentions.13 Thankfully, this is something we can combat in the workplace by treating employees as individuals, and not

stereotype threat The degree to which we internally agree with the generally negative stereotyped perceptions of our groups.

stereotyping Judging someone on the basis of our perception of the group to which that person belongs.

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 47

highlighting group differences. The following organizational changes can be successful in reducing stereotype threat: increasing awareness of how stereo- types may be perpetuated, reducing differential and preferential treatment through objective assessments, banning stereotyped practices and messages, confronting micro-aggressions against minority groups, and adopting transpar- ent practices that signal the value of all employees.14

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

PersoNal INveNTory assessmeNTs Intercultural Sensitivity Scale

Are you aware of intercultural dynamics? Take this PIA to assess your intercultural sensitivity.

Discrimination in the Workplace To review, rather than looking at individual characteristics, unfair discrimina- tion assumes everyone in a group is the same. This discrimination is often very harmful for employees, as we’ve just discussed, and for organizations.

Exhibit 2-1 provides definitions and examples of some forms of discrimina- tion in organizations. Although many are prohibited by law and therefore are not a part of organizations’ official policies, the practices persist. Tens of thou- sands of cases of employment discrimination are documented every year, and many more go unreported. Since discrimination has increasingly come under

Forms of DiscriminationExhibit 2-1

Type of Discrimination Definition Examples from Organizations

Discriminatory policies Actions taken by representatives of the Older workers may be targeted for layoffs or practices organization that deny equal opportunity because they are highly paid and have lucrative

to perform or unequal rewards for benefits. performance.

Sexual harassment Unwanted sexual advances and other Salespeople at one company went on company-paid verbal or physical conduct of a sexual visits to strip clubs, brought strippers into the office to nature that create a hostile or offensive celebrate promotions, and fostered pervasive sexual work environment. rumors.

Intimidation Overt threats or bullying directed at African-American employees at some companies have members of specific groups of employees. found nooses hanging over their work stations.

Mockery and insults Jokes or negative stereotypes; sometimes Arab-Americans have been asked at work whether the result of jokes taken too far. they were carrying bombs or were members of

terrorist organizations. Exclusion Exclusion of certain people from job Many women in finance claim they are assigned to

opportunities, social events, discussions, marginal job roles or are given light workloads that or informal mentoring; can occur don’t lead to promotion. unintentionally.

Incivility Disrespectful treatment, including Female lawyers note that male attorneys frequently behaving in an aggressive manner, cut them off or do not adequately address their interrupting the person, or ignoring comments. his or her opinions.

Sources: J. Levitz and P. Shishkin, “More Workers Cite Age Bias after Layoffs,” The Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2009, D1–D2; W. M. Bulkeley, “A Data-Storage Titan Confronts Bias Claims,”

The Wall Street Journal, September 12, 2007, A1, A16; D. Walker, “Incident with Noose Stirs Old Memories,” McClatchy-Tribune Business News, June 29, 2008; D. Solis, “Racial Horror Stories Keep

EEOC Busy,” Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News, July 30, 2005, 1; H. Ibish and A. Stewart, Report on Hate Crimes and Discrimination against Arab Americans: The Post-September 11 Backlash,

September 11, 2001–October 11, 2001 (Washington, DC: American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, 2003); A. Raghavan, “Wall Street’s Disappearing Women,” Forbes, March 16, 2009, 72–78;

and L. M. Cortina, “Unseen Injustice: Incivility as Modern Discrimination in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review 33, no. 1 (2008): 55–75.

48 PART 2 The Individual

both legal scrutiny and social disapproval, most overt forms have faded, which may have resulted in an increase in more covert forms like incivility or exclu- sion, especially when leaders look the other way.15

As you can see, discrimination can occur in many ways, and its effects can vary depending on organizational context and the personal biases of employ- ees. Some forms of discrimination like exclusion or incivility are especially hard to root out because they may occur simply because the actor isn’t aware of the effects of his or her actions. Like stereotype threat, actual discrimination can lead to increased negative consequences for employers, including reduced produc- tivity and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), more conflict, increased turnover, and even increased risk-taking behavior.16 Unfair discrimination also leaves qualified job candidates out of initial hiring and promotions. Thus, even if an employment discrimination lawsuit is never filed, a strong business case can be made for aggressively working to eliminate unfair discrimination.

Whether it is overt or covert, intentional or unintentional, discrimination is one of the primary factors that prevent diversity. On the other hand, recogniz- ing diversity opportunities can lead to an effective diversity management pro- gram and ultimately to a better organization. Diversity is a broad term, and the phrase workplace diversity can refer to any characteristic that makes people dif- ferent from one another. The following section covers some important surface- level characteristics that differentiate members of the workforce.

Biographical Characteristics Biographical characteristics such as age, gender, race, and disability are some of the most obvious ways employees differ. Let’s begin by looking at factors that are easily definable and readily available—data that can be obtained, for the most part, from an employee’s human resources (HR) file. Variations in surface-level characteristics may be the basis for discrimination against classes of employees, so it is worth knowing how related they actually are to work outcomes. As a general rule, many biographical differences are not important to actual work outcomes, and far more variation occurs within groups sharing biographical characteristics than between them.

age Age in the workforce is likely to be an issue of increasing importance during the next decade for many reasons. For one, the workforce is aging worldwide in most developed countries;17 by projections, 93 percent of the growth in the labor force from 2006 to 2016 will have come from workers over age 54.18 In the United States, the proportion of the workforce age 55 and older is 22 per- cent and increasing,19 and legislation has, for all intents and purposes, outlawed mandatory retirement. Moreover, the United States and Australia, among other countries, have laws directly against age discrimination.20 Most workers today no longer have to retire at age 70, and 62 percent of workers age 45 to 60 plan to delay retirement.21

The stereotypes of older workers as being behind the times, grumpy, and inflexible are changing. Managers often see a number of positive qualities older workers bring to their jobs, such as experience, judgment, a strong work ethic, and commitment to quality. The Public Utilities Board, the water agency of Singapore, reports that 27 percent of its workforce is over age 55 because older workers bring workforce stability.22 And industries like health care, education, government, and nonprofits often welcome older workers.23 But older workers are still perceived as less adaptable and less motivated to learn new technology.24

2-3 Describe how the key biographical characteristics are relevant to oB.

survivor.” Men with shaved heads con- vey aggressiveness, competitiveness, and independence, he adds. Will you join the 13 percent of men who shave their heads? Though we don’t wish to advocate head-shaving for this reason, it does demonstrate how biased we continue to be in judging people by su- perficial characteristics. Time will tell if this situation ever improves.

Sources: D. Baer, “People Are Psychologi- cally Biased to See Bald Men as Domi- nant Leaders,” Business Insider (February 13, 2015), http://www.businessinsider. com/bald-men-signals-dominance-2015-2; J. Misener, “Men with Shaved Heads Ap- pear More Dominant, Study Finds,” The Huffington Post (October 1, 2012), www. huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/bald-men- dominant-shaved-heads-study_n_1930489. html; A. E. Mannes, “Shorn Scalps and Per- ceptions of Male Dominance,” Social Psycho- logical and Personality Science, (2012), doi: 10.1177/1948550612449490; and R. E. Silverman, “Bald Is Powerful,” The Wall Street Journal (October 3, 2012), B1, B6.

biographical characteristics Personal characteristics—such as age, gender, race, and length of tenure—that are objective and easily obtained from personnel records. These characteristics are representative of surface- level diversity.

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 49

Surprisingly, it appears true that bald is better for men in the work-place. A recent study showed that observers believe a male’s shaved head indicates greater masculinity, dominance, and leadership potential than longer or thinning hair. Thinning hair was perceived as the least power- ful look, and other studies have agreed that male-pattern baldness (when some hair remains) is not considered advantageous. Why is this?

In some respects, the reported youthful advantage of a shaved head is counterintuitive. Because we have more hair when we are young, and con- temporary culture considers youthful- ness a desirable characteristic in the workplace (if you doubt this, see the discussions on aging in this chapter), it would make more sense for a hairless head to be a distinct disadvantage. Yet the media is loaded with images of pow- erful men with shaved heads—military

heroes, winning athletes, and action he- roes. No wonder study participants de- clared that the men with shaved heads were an inch taller and 13 percent stronger than the same men with hair.

A bald head has become the hall- mark of some important business leaders, notably Jeff Bezos of Amazon, Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs, Marc Andreessen of Netscape, and “Shark Tank” investor Daymond John. Men who shave their heads report it can give them a business advantage, whether or not it makes them look younger (which is debatable). According to psychologist Caroline Keating, just as older silver-back gorillas are “typi- cally the powerful actors in their social groups,” so it is in the office, where baldness may “signal who is in charge and potentially dangerous.” Research professor Michael Cunningham agrees, adding that baldness “is nature’s way of telling the rest of the world you are a

survivor.” Men with shaved heads con- vey aggressiveness, competitiveness, and independence, he adds. Will you join the 13 percent of men who shave their heads? Though we don’t wish to advocate head-shaving for this reason, it does demonstrate how biased we continue to be in judging people by su- perficial characteristics. Time will tell if this situation ever improves.

Sources: D. Baer, “People Are Psychologi- cally Biased to See Bald Men as Domi- nant Leaders,” Business Insider (February 13, 2015), http://www.businessinsider. com/bald-men-signals-dominance-2015-2; J. Misener, “Men with Shaved Heads Ap- pear More Dominant, Study Finds,” The Huffington Post (October 1, 2012), www. huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/01/bald-men- dominant-shaved-heads-study_n_1930489. html; A. E. Mannes, “Shorn Scalps and Per- ceptions of Male Dominance,” Social Psycho- logical and Personality Science, (2012), doi: 10.1177/1948550612449490; and R. E. Silverman, “Bald Is Powerful,” The Wall Street Journal (October 3, 2012), B1, B6.

biographical characteristics Personal characteristics—such as age, gender, race, and length of tenure—that are objective and easily obtained from personnel records. These characteristics are representative of surface- level diversity.

bald is better Myth or Science?

When organizations seek individuals who are open to change and training, the perceived negatives associated with age clearly hinder the initial hiring of older workers and increase the likelihood they will be let go during cutbacks.

Now let’s take a look at the evidence. What effect does age actually have on turnover, absenteeism, productivity, and satisfaction? Regarding turnover, the older you are, the less likely you are to quit your job.25 As workers get older, they have fewer alternate job opportunities because their skills have become more specialized. Within organizations, older workers’ longer tenure tends to provide them with higher wages, longer paid vacations, and benefits that may bind them to their employers.

It may seem likely that age is positively correlated to absenteeism, but this isn’t true. Most studies show that older employees have lower rates of avoid- able absence versus younger employees.26 Furthermore, older workers do not have more psychological problems or day-to-day physical health problems than younger workers.27

The majority of studies have shown “virtually no relationship between age and job performance,” according to Director Harvey Sterns of the Institute for Life-Span Development and Gerontology.28 Indeed, some studies indicate that older adults perform better. In Munich, a 4-year study of 3,800 Mercedes-Benz workers found that “the older workers seemed to know better how to avoid severe errors,” said Matthias Weiss, the academic coordinator of the study.29 Related to performance, there is a conception that creativity lessens as people age. Researcher David Galenson, who studied the ages of peak creativity, found

50 PART 2 The Individual

that people who create through experimentation do “their greatest work in their 40s, 50s, and 60s. These artists rely on wisdom, which increases with age.”30

What about age and satisfaction? Regarding life satisfaction, which we will discuss further in later chapters, there is a cultural assumption that older people are more prone to depression and loneliness. Actually, a study of adults ages 18 to 94 found that positive moods increased with age. “Contrary to the popular view that youth is the best time of life, the peak of emotional life may not occur until well into the seventh decade,” researcher Laura Carstensen said.31

Regarding job satisfaction, an important topic in Chapter 3, a review of more than 800 studies found that older workers tend to be more satisfied with their work, report better relationships with coworkers, and are more committed to their organizations.32 Other studies, however, have found that job satisfaction increases up to middle age, at which point it begins to drop off. When we sepa- rate the results by job type, though, we find that satisfaction tends to continually increase among professionals as they age, whereas among nonprofessionals it falls during middle age and then rises again in the later years.

In sum, we can see that the surface-level characteristic of an employee’s age is an unfounded basis for discrimination, and that an age-diverse workforce is a benefit to an organization.

Sex Few issues initiate more debates, misconceptions, and unsupported opinions than whether women perform as well on jobs as men.

The best place to begin to consider this is with the recognition that few, if any, differences between men and women affect job performance.33 Though men may have slightly higher math ability and women slightly higher verbal ability, the differences are fairly small, and there are no consistent male–female differ- ences in problem-solving ability, analytical skills, or learning ability.34 One meta- analysis of job performance studies found that women scored slightly higher than men on performance measures.35 A separate meta-analysis of 95 leadership studies indicated that women and men are rated equally effective as leaders.36

At Tofutti, maker of dairy-free products, older employees are an integral part of the workforce. Tofutti’s CEO David Mintz values the experience, work ethic, maturity, enthusiasm, knowledge, and skills that older workers bring to their jobs. He says older employees have fewer absences, make fewer mistakes, are better at solving problems, and are willing to work more hours. Sources: Julio Cortez/AP images

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 51

Yet biases and stereotypes persist. In the hiring realm, managers are influ- enced by gender bias when selecting candidates for certain positions.37 For instance, men are preferred in hiring decisions for male-dominated occupa- tions, particularly when men are doing the hiring.38 Once on the job, men and women may be offered a similar number of developmental experiences, but females are less likely to be assigned challenging positions by men, assignments that could help them achieve higher organizational positions.39 Moreover, men are more likely to be chosen for leadership roles even though men and women are equally effective leaders. A study of 20 organizations in Spain, for example, suggested that men are generally selected for leadership roles that require han- dling organizational crises.40 According to Naomi Sutherland, senior partner in diversity at recruiter Korn Ferry, “Consciously or subconsciously, companies are still hesitant to take the risk on someone who looks different from their stan- dard leadership profile.”41

Sex discrimination has a pervasive negative impact. Notably, women still earn less money than men for the same positions,42 even in traditionally female roles.43 In a recent experiment, experienced managers allocated 71 percent of the fictional pay raise funds for male employees, leaving only 29 percent for females.44 Working mothers also face “maternal wall bias,” meaning they often are not considered for new positions after they have children, and both men and women experience discrimination for their family caregiving roles.45 Women who receive fewer challenging assignments and development oppor- tunities from biased managers tend to curtail their management aspirations.46 Research continues to underline that sex discrimination is detrimental to orga- nizational performance.47

We’ve seen that there are many misconceptions and contradictions about male and female workers. Thankfully, many countries have laws against sex dis- crimination including Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Other countries, such as Belgium, France, Norway, and Spain are seeking gen- der diversity through laws to increase the percentage of women on boards of directors.48 Gender biases and gender discrimination are still serious issues, but there are indications that the situation is improving.

Race and Ethnicity Race is a controversial issue in society and in organizations. We define race as the heritage people use to identify themselves; ethnicity is the additional set of cultural characteristics that often overlaps with race. Typically, we associate race with biology and ethnicity with culture, but there is a history of self-identify- ing for both classifications. Laws against race and ethnic discrimination are in effect in many countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.49

Race and ethnicity have been studied as they relate to employment out- comes such as hiring decisions, performance evaluations, pay, and workplace discrimination. Individuals may slightly favor colleagues of their own race in performance evaluations, promotion decisions, and pay raises, although such differences are not found consistently, especially when highly structured meth- ods of decision making are employed.50 Also, some industries have remained less racially diverse than others. For instance, U.S. advertising and media orga- nizations suffer from a lack of racial diversity in their management ranks even though their client base is increasingly ethnically diverse.51

Finally, members of racial and ethnic minorities report higher levels of dis- crimination in the workplace.52 African Americans generally fare worse than whites in employment decisions (a finding that may not apply outside the United States). They receive lower ratings in employment interviews, lower job

52 PART 2 The Individual

performance ratings, less pay, and fewer promotions.53 Lastly, while this does not necessarily prove overt racial discrimination, African Americans are often discriminated against even in controlled experiments. For example, one study of low-wage jobs found that African American applicants with no criminal his- tory received fewer job offers than did white applicants with criminal records.54

As we discussed before, discrimination—for any reason—leads to increased turnover, which is detrimental to organizational performance. While better rep- resentation of all racial groups in organizations remains a goal, an individual of minority status is much less likely to leave the organization if there is a feeling of inclusiveness, known as a positive diversity climate.55 A positive climate for diversity can also lead to increased sales, suggesting there are organizational performance gains associated with reducing racial and ethnic discrimination.56

How do we move beyond the destructiveness of discrimination? The answer is in understanding one another’s viewpoint. Evidence suggests that some people find interacting with other racial groups uncomfortable unless there are clear behavioral scripts to guide their behavior,57 so creating diverse work groups focused on mutual goals could be helpful, along with developing a posi- tive diversity climate.

Disabilities Workplace policies, both official and circumstantial, regarding individuals with physical or mental disabilities vary from country to country. Countries such as Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan have specific laws to protect individuals with disabilities.58 These laws have resulted in greater ac- ceptance and accommodation of people with physical or mental impairments. In the United States, for instance, the representation of individuals with disabili- ties in the workforce rapidly increased with the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990).59 According to the ADA, employers are required to make reasonable accommodations so their workplaces will be accessible to individuals with physical or mental disabilities.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency responsible for enforcing employment discrimination laws, classifies a person as disabled who has any physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. One of the most controversial aspects of the ADA is the provision that requires employers to make reasonable accom- modations for people with psychiatric disabilities.60 Examples of recognized disabilities include missing limbs, seizure disorder, Down syndrome, deafness, schizophrenia, alcoholism, diabetes, depression, and chronic back pain. These conditions share almost no common features, so there’s no specific definition about how each condition is related to employment.

The impact of disabilities on employment outcomes has been explored from a variety of perspectives. On one hand, when disability status is randomly manipulated among hypothetical candidates, disabled individuals are rated as having superior personal qualities like dependability.61 Another review sug- gested that workers with disabilities receive higher performance evaluations. However, individuals with disabilities tend to encounter lower performance expectations and are less likely to be hired.62 Mental disabilities may impair performance more than physical disabilities: Individuals with such common mental health issues as depression and anxiety are significantly more likely to be absent from work.63

The elimination of discrimination against the disabled workforce has long been problematic. In Europe, for instance, policies to motivate employers have failed to boost the workforce participation rate for workers with disabilities, and outright quota systems in Germany, France, and Poland have backfired.64

positive diversity climate In an organi- zation, an environment of inclusiveness and an acceptance of diversity.

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 53

However, the recognition of the talents and abilities of individuals with disabili- ties has made a positive impact. In addition, technology and workplace advance- ments have greatly increased the scope of available jobs for those with all types of disabilities. Managers need to be attuned to the true requirements of each job and match the skills of the individual to them, providing accommodations when needed. But what happens when employees do not disclose their disabili- ties? Let’s discuss this next.

hidden Disabilities As we mentioned earlier, disabilities include observable characteristics like miss- ing limbs, illnesses that require a person to use a wheelchair, and blindness. Other disabilities may not be obvious, at least at first. Unless an individual de- cides to disclose a disability that isn’t easily observable, it can remain hidden at the discretion of the employee. These are called hidden disabilities (or invisible disabilities). Hidden, or invisible, disabilities generally fall under the catego- ries of sensory disabilities (for example, impaired hearing), autoimmune dis- orders (like rheumatoid arthritis), chronic illness or pain (like carpal tunnel syndrome), cognitive or learning impairments (like ADHD), sleep disorders (like insomnia), and psychological challenges (like PTSD).65

As a result of recent changes to the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA), U.S. organizations must accommodate employees with a very broad range of impairments. However, employees must disclose their conditions to their employers in order to be eligible for workplace accommodations and employment protection. Since many employees do not want to disclose their invisible disabilities, they are prevented from getting the workplace accommodations they need in order to thrive in their jobs. Research indicates that individuals with hidden disabilities are afraid of being stigma- tized or ostracized if they disclose their disabilities to others in the workplace, and they believe their managers will think they are less capable of strong job performance.66

Employees with disabilities are valuable assets at the Anne-Sophie Hotel in Germany, where they use their talents and abilities in performing kitchen and service jobs. Posing here with Chef Serkan Guezelcoban (in blue shoes) at the hotel’s Handicap restaurant are some of the 18 disabled employees who work side by side with other employees of the hotel’s 39-member staff. Sources: Thomas Kienzle/EPA/Landov

54 PART 2 The Individual

In some ways, a hidden disability is not truly invisible. For example, a person with undisclosed autism will still exhibit the behaviors characteristic of the con- dition, such as difficulty with verbal communication and lack of adaptability.67 You may observe behaviors that lead you to suspect an individual has a hidden disability. Unfortunately, you may attribute the behavior to other causes—for instance, you may incorrectly ascribe the slow, slurred speech of a coworker to an alcohol problem rather than to the long-term effects of a stroke.

As for the employee, research suggests that disclosure helps all—the individ- ual, others, and organizations. Disclosure may increase the job satisfaction and well-being of the individual, help others understand and assist the individual to succeed in the workplace, and allow the organization to accommodate the situ- ation to achieve top performance.68

Other Differentiating Characteristics The last set of characteristics we’ll look at includes tenure, religion, sexual ori- entation and gender identity, and cultural identity. These characteristics illus- trate deep-level differences that provide opportunities for workplace diversity, as long as discrimination can be overcome.

tenure Except for gender and racial differences, few issues are more subject to miscon- ceptions and speculations than the impact of seniority and tenure, meaning time spent in a job, organization, or field.

Extensive reviews have been conducted of the seniority–productivity rela- tionship.69 If we define seniority as time on a particular job, the evidence demon- strates a positive relationship between seniority and job productivity. So tenure, expressed as work experience, appears to be a good predictor of employee pro- ductivity, though there is some evidence that the relationship is not linear: dif- ferences in tenure are more important to job performance for relatively new or inexperienced employees than among those who have been on the job longer. To use an NFL analogy, a second-year quarterback has more of an edge over a rookie than a 10th-year quarterback has over one in his 9th year.

Religion Not only do religious and nonreligious people question each other’s belief systems; often people of different religious faiths conflict. There are few—if any—countries in which religion is a nonissue in the workplace. For this reason, employers are prohibited by law from discriminating against employees based on religion in many countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.70

Islam is one of the most popular religions in the world, and it is the majority religion in many countries. However, in the United States, Muslims are a minor- ity group that is growing. There are nearly 3 million Muslims in the United States, and the number is predicted to double by 2030, when they will repre- sent 1.7 percent of the population, according to the Pew Research Center. At that point, there will be as many Muslims in the United States as there are Jews and Episcopalians.71 Despite these numbers, there is evidence that people are discriminated against for their Islamic faith even in studies. For instance, U.S. job applicants in Muslim-identified religious attire who applied for hypothetical retail jobs had shorter, more interpersonally negative interviews than applicants who did not wear Muslim-identified attire.72

2–4 explain how other differen-tiating characteristics factor into oB.

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 55

Faith can be an employment issue wherever religious beliefs prohibit or encourage certain behaviors. The behavioral expectations can be informal, such as employees leaving work early on Christmas Eve. Or they may be systemic, such as the Monday to Friday workweek, which accommodates a Christian tra- dition of not working on Sundays and a Jewish tradition of not working on Saturdays. Religious individuals may also believe they have an obligation to express their beliefs in the workplace, and those who do not share those beliefs may object.

Religious discrimination has been a growing source of discrimination claims in the United States, partially because the issues are complex. Recently, Samantha Elauf, who was turned down for employment because she wears a hijab, a black head scarf, sued for religious discrimination. “I learned I was not hired by Abercrombie because I wear a head scarf, which is a symbol of mod- esty in my Muslim faith,” she said. She was not aware of the organization’s rule against head coverings and did not mention her reason for the scarf. Should employers be required to deduce why applicants dress as they do and then pro- tect them? Even the Supreme Court is not certain.73

Sexual orientation and gender identity While much has changed, the full acceptance and accommodation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) employees remains a work in progress. In the United States, a Harvard University study sent fictitious but realistic ré- sumés to 1,700 actual entry-level job openings. The applications were identical with one exception: Half mentioned involvement in gay organizations during college, and the other half did not. The applications without the mention re- ceived 60 percent more callbacks than the ones with it.74

Perhaps as a result of perceived discrimination, many LGBT employees do not disclose their status. For example, John Browne, former CEO of BP, hid his sexual orientation until he was 59, when the press threatened to disclose that he was gay. Fearing the story would result in turmoil for the company, he resigned. Browne wrote recently, “Since my outing in 2007, many societies around the world have done more to embrace people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. But the business world has a long way to go.”75

U.S. federal law does not prohibit discrimination against employees based on sexual orientation, though 29 states and more than 160 municipalities do. For states and municipalities that protect against discrimination based on sexual orientation, roughly as many claims are filed for sexual orientation discrimination as for sex and race discrimination.76 Some other countries are more progressive: for instance, Australia has laws against discriminating on the basis of sexual preference, and the United Kingdom has similar laws regard- ing sexual orientation.77 However, the distinctions in these laws may not be broad enough—researchers have acknowledged a new acronym, QUILTBAG, to describe individuals who are queer/questioning, undecided, intersex, les- bian, transgender, bisexual, asexual, or gay.78

As a first step in the United States, the federal government has prohibited discrimination against government employees based on sexual orientation. The EEOC recently held that sex-stereotyping against lesbian, gay, and bisexual indi- viduals represents gender discrimination enforceable under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.79 Also, pending federal legislation against discrimination based on sex- ual orientation—the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)—passed the Senate but is not yet law.80

Even in the absence of federal legislation, many organizations have imple- mented policies and procedures that cover sexual orientation. IBM, once famous for requiring all employees to wear white shirts and ties, has changed

56 PART 2 The Individual

its ultra-conservative environment. Former vice president Ted Childs said, “IBM ensures that people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender feel safe, wel- comed and valued within the global walls of our business…. The contributions that are made by [gay and transgender] IBMers accrue directly to our bottom line and ensure the success of our business.”81

IBM is not alone. Surveys indicate that more than 90 percent of the Fortune 500 have policies that cover sexual orientation. As for gender identity, compa- nies are increasingly adopting policies to govern the way their organizations treat transgender employees. In 2001, only eight companies in the Fortune 500 had policies on gender identity. That number is now more than 250.

However, among the Fortune 1,000, some noteworthy companies do not cur- rently have domestic-partner benefits or nondiscrimination clauses for LGBT employees, including ExxonMobil, currently number 2 in the Fortune rankings

I’m gay, but no one at my workplace knows it. How much should I be will- ing to tell? I want to be sure to have a shot at the big positions in the firm.

— Ryan

Dear Ryan: Unfortunately, you are right to be con- cerned. Here are some suggestions:

• Look for an inclusive company cul- ture. Apple CEO Tim Cook said, “I’ve had the good fortune to work at a company that loves creativity and in- novation and knows it can only flour- ish when you embrace people’s dif- ferences. Not everyone is so lucky.” Recent research has focused on discovering new methods to coun- teract a discrimination culture in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

• Choose your moral ground. Do you feel you have a responsibility to “come out” to help effect social change? Do you have a right to keep your private life private? The balance is a private decision. A recent study by the U.S. Human Rights Campaign indicated that only half of LGBT em- ployees nationwide disclose their status.

• Consider your future in top manage- ment. Corporate-level leaders are

urged to be open with peers and employees. As Ernst & Young global vice chairperson Beth Brooke said about her decades of staying clos- eted, the pressure to be “authentic” adds stress if you are keeping your gay status a secret.

• Weigh your options. The word from people at the top who are gay (some who have come out and others who have not) is mixed. Brooke said, “Life really did get better” after she announced her status in a company- sponsored video. Mark Stephanz, a vice chairman at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, agreed, remarking that “most people still deal with you the same way they always do.” Yet Deena Fidas, deputy director for the largest LGBT civil rights group in the United States, reported that being gay in the workplace is still “far from being a ‘nonissue’.”

• Be aware of international and na- tional laws. Sadly, some nations and states are intolerant. You will need to study the laws to be sure you will be safe from repercussions when you reveal your status.

So, think about your decision from both an ethical and a self-interested point of view. Your timing depends not

only on what you think are your ethi- cal responsibilities, but also on your context—where you work, the culture of your organization, and the support of the people within it. Thankfully, globaliza- tion is ensuring that the world becomes increasingly accepting and fair.

Good luck in your career!

Sources: M. D. Birtel, “’Treating’ Prejudice: An Exposure-Therapy Approach to Reduc- ing Negative Reactions Toward Stigmatized Groups,” Psychological Science (November 2012): 1379–86; L. Cooper and J. Raspanti, “The Cost of the Closet and the Rewards of Inclusion,” Human Rights Campaign report (May 2014), http://hrc-assets.s3-website- us-east-1.amazonaws.com//files/assets/ resources/Cost_of_the_Closet_May2014. pdf; N. Rumens and J. Broomfield, “Gay Men in the Police: Identity Disclosure and Man- agement Issues,” Human Resource Man- agement Journal (July 2012): 283–98; and A. M Ryan and J. L. Wessel, “Sexual Orien- tation Harassment in the Workplace: When Do Observers Intervene?” Journal of Orga- nizational Behavior (May 2012): 488–509.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results ob- tained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any deci- sion made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

is it okay to be gay at work? Career oBjectives

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 57

of the largest U.S. companies.82 Some companies claim they do not need to provide LGBT benefits for religious reasons. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed that Hobby Lobby, a retail arts and crafts chain, does not need to pro- vide contraception insurance coverage due to the religious objections of its founding family, and many fear this ruling will pave the way for overt LGBT discrimination by organizations.83 Moreover, some organizations that claim to be inclusive don’t live up to the claim. For example, a recent study of five social cooperatives in Italy indicated that these so-called inclusive organizations actu- ally expect individuals to remain quiet about their status.84

Thus, while times have certainly changed, sexual orientation and gender identity remain individual differences that organizations must address in elimi- nating discrimination and promoting diversity.

Cultural identity We have seen that people sometimes define themselves in terms of race and eth- nicity. Many people carry a strong cultural identity as well, a link with the culture of family ancestry or youth that lasts a lifetime, no matter where the individual may live in the world. People choose their cultural identity, and they also choose how closely they observe the norms of that culture. Cultural norms influence the workplace, sometimes resulting in clashes. Organizations must adapt.

Workplace practices that coincided with the norms of a person’s cultural identity were commonplace years ago, when societies were less mobile. People looked for work near familial homes and organizations established holidays, observances, practices, and customs that suited the majority. Organizations were generally not expected to accommodate each individual’s preferences.

Thanks to global integration and changing labor markets, today’s organiza- tions do well to understand and respect the cultural identities of their employ- ees, both as groups and as individuals. A U.S. company looking to do business in, say, Latin America, needs to understand that employees in those cultures expect long summer holidays. A company that requires employees to work dur- ing this culturally established break will meet strong resistance.

An organization seeking to be sensitive to the cultural identities of its employees should look beyond accommodating its majority groups and instead create as much of an individualized approach to practices and norms as pos- sible. Often, managers can provide the bridge of workplace flexibility to meet both organizational goals and individual needs.

Watch It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Verizon: Diversity.

Ability Contrary to what we were taught in grade school, we weren’t all created equal in our abilities. For example, regardless of how motivated you are, you may not be able to act as well as Jennifer Lawrence, play basketball as well as LeBron James, or write as well as Stephen King. Of course, all of us have strengths and weaknesses that make us relatively superior or inferior to others in performing certain tasks or activities. From management’s standpoint, the challenge is to understand the differences to increase the likelihood that a given employee will perform the job well.

2-5 Demonstrate the relevance of intellectual and physical abilities to oB.

58 PART 2 The Individual

cultures, but those differences become much smaller when we take into account educational and economic differences.90

Jobs differ in the demands they place on intellectual abilities. Research con- sistently indicates a correspondence between cognitive ability and task perfor- mance.91 Where employee tasks are highly routine and there are few or no opportunities to exercise discretion, a high IQ is not as important to perform- ing well. However, that does not mean people with high IQs cannot have an impact on traditionally less complex jobs.

It might surprise you that the intelligence test most widely used in hiring decisions takes only 12 minutes to complete. It’s the Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test. There are different forms of the test, but each has 50 questions and the same general construct. Here are two questions to try:

• When rope is selling at $0.10 a foot, how many feet can you buy for $0.60?

• Assume the first two statements are true. Is the final one:

1. True. 2. False. 3. Not certain.

a. The boy plays baseball. b. All baseball players wear hats. c. The boy wears a hat.

The Wonderlic measures both speed (almost nobody has time to answer every question) and power (the questions get harder as you go along), so the average score is quite low—about 21 of 50. Because the Wonderlic is able to provide valid information cheaply (for $5 to $10 per applicant), many organi- zations use it in hiring decisions, including Publix supermarkets, Manpower staffing systems, British Petroleum (BP), and Dish satellite systems.92 Most of these companies don’t give up other hiring tools, such as application forms or interviews. Rather, they add the Wonderlic for its ability to provide valid data on applicants’ intelligence levels.

While intelligence is a big help in performing a job well, it doesn’t make people happier or more satisfied with their jobs. Why not? Although intelligent people perform better and tend to have more interesting jobs, they are also more critical when evaluating their job conditions. Thus, smart people have it better, but they also expect more.93

physical abilities Though the changing nature of work suggests intellectual abilities are increas- ingly important for many jobs, physical abilities have been and will remain valu- able. Research on hundreds of jobs has identified nine basic abilities needed in the performance of physical tasks.94 These are described in Exhibit 2-3. High employee performance is likely to be achieved when the extent to which a job requires each of the nine abilities matches the abilities of employees in that job.

In sum, organizations are increasingly aware that an optimally productive workforce includes all types of people and does not automatically exclude any- one on the basis of personal characteristics. The potential benefits of diversity are enormous for forward-thinking managers. For example, a pilot program of software company SAP in Germany, India, and Ireland has found that employ- ees with autism perform excellently in precision-oriented tasks like debugging software.95 Of course, integrating diverse people into an optimally productive workforce takes skill. We will discuss how to bring the talents of a diverse work- force together in the next section.

general mental ability (GMa) an overall factor of intelligence, as suggested by the positive correlations among specific intel- lectual ability dimensions.

physical abilities The capacity to do tasks that demand stamina, dexterity, strength, and similar characteristics.

What does ability mean? As we use the term, ability is an individual’s current capacity to perform the various tasks in a job. Overall abilities are essentially made up of two sets of factors: intellectual and physical.

intellectual abilities Intellectual abilities are abilities needed to perform mental activities—think- ing, reasoning, and problem solving. Most societies place a high value on intel- ligence, and for good reason. Smart people generally earn more money and attain higher levels of education. They are also more likely to emerge as leaders of groups. However, assessing and measuring intellectual ability are not always simple. People aren’t consistently capable of correctly assessing their own cogni- tive ability.85 IQ tests are designed to ascertain a person’s general intellectual abilities, but the origins, influence factors, and testing of intelligence quotient (IQ) are controversial.86 So, too, are popular college admission tests, such as the SAT and ACT, and graduate admission tests in business (GMAT), law (LSAT), and medicine (MCAT). The firms that produce these tests don’t claim they as- sess intelligence, but experts know they do.87

The seven most frequently cited dimensions making up intellectual abili- ties are number aptitude, verbal comprehension, perceptual speed, inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, spatial visualization, and memory.88 Exhibit 2-2 describes these dimensions.

Intelligence dimensions are positively correlated, so if you score high on verbal comprehension, for example, you’re more likely to also score high on spatial visualization. The correlations aren’t perfect, meaning people do have specific abilities that predict important work-related outcomes when considered individually.89 However, they are high enough that researchers also recognize a general factor of intelligence, general mental ability (GMA). Evidence supports the idea that the structures and measures of intellectual abilities generalize across cultures. Someone in Venezuela or Sudan, for instance, does not have a different set of mental abilities than a U.S. or Czech individual. There is some evidence that IQ scores vary to some degree across

ability an individual’s capacity to perform the various tasks in a job.

intellectual abilities The capacity to do mental activities—thinking, reasoning, and problem solving.

Dimensions of intellectual abilityExhibit 2-2

Dimension Description Job Example

Number aptitude Ability to do speedy and accurate Accountant: Computing the sales tax on a set of items arithmetic

Verbal comprehension Ability to understand what is read Plant manager: Following corporate policies on hiring or heard and the relationship of words to each other

Perceptual speed Ability to identify visual similarities Fire investigator: Identifying clues to support a charge of arson and differences quickly and accurately

Inductive reasoning Ability to identify a logical sequence Market researcher: Forecasting demand for a product in the in a problem and then solve the next time period problem

Deductive reasoning Ability to use logic and assess the Supervisor: Choosing between two different suggestions implications of an argument offered by employees

Spatial visualization Ability to imagine how an object Interior decorator: Redecorating an office would look if its position in space were changed

Memory Ability to retain and recall past Salesperson: Remembering the names of customers experiences

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 59

cultures, but those differences become much smaller when we take into account educational and economic differences.90

Jobs differ in the demands they place on intellectual abilities. Research con- sistently indicates a correspondence between cognitive ability and task perfor- mance.91 Where employee tasks are highly routine and there are few or no opportunities to exercise discretion, a high IQ is not as important to perform- ing well. However, that does not mean people with high IQs cannot have an impact on traditionally less complex jobs.

It might surprise you that the intelligence test most widely used in hiring decisions takes only 12 minutes to complete. It’s the Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test. There are different forms of the test, but each has 50 questions and the same general construct. Here are two questions to try:

• When rope is selling at $0.10 a foot, how many feet can you buy for $0.60?

• Assume the first two statements are true. Is the final one:

1. True. 2. False. 3. Not certain.

a. The boy plays baseball. b. All baseball players wear hats. c. The boy wears a hat.

The Wonderlic measures both speed (almost nobody has time to answer every question) and power (the questions get harder as you go along), so the average score is quite low—about 21 of 50. Because the Wonderlic is able to provide valid information cheaply (for $5 to $10 per applicant), many organi- zations use it in hiring decisions, including Publix supermarkets, Manpower staffing systems, British Petroleum (BP), and Dish satellite systems.92 Most of these companies don’t give up other hiring tools, such as application forms or interviews. Rather, they add the Wonderlic for its ability to provide valid data on applicants’ intelligence levels.

While intelligence is a big help in performing a job well, it doesn’t make people happier or more satisfied with their jobs. Why not? Although intelligent people perform better and tend to have more interesting jobs, they are also more critical when evaluating their job conditions. Thus, smart people have it better, but they also expect more.93

physical abilities Though the changing nature of work suggests intellectual abilities are increas- ingly important for many jobs, physical abilities have been and will remain valu- able. Research on hundreds of jobs has identified nine basic abilities needed in the performance of physical tasks.94 These are described in Exhibit 2-3. High employee performance is likely to be achieved when the extent to which a job requires each of the nine abilities matches the abilities of employees in that job.

In sum, organizations are increasingly aware that an optimally productive workforce includes all types of people and does not automatically exclude any- one on the basis of personal characteristics. The potential benefits of diversity are enormous for forward-thinking managers. For example, a pilot program of software company SAP in Germany, India, and Ireland has found that employ- ees with autism perform excellently in precision-oriented tasks like debugging software.95 Of course, integrating diverse people into an optimally productive workforce takes skill. We will discuss how to bring the talents of a diverse work- force together in the next section.

general mental ability (GMa) an overall factor of intelligence, as suggested by the positive correlations among specific intel- lectual ability dimensions.

physical abilities The capacity to do tasks that demand stamina, dexterity, strength, and similar characteristics.

60 PART 2 The Individual

Implementing Diversity Management Strategies Having discussed a variety of ways in which people differ, we now look at how a manager can and should manage these differences. Diversity management makes everyone more aware of and sensitive to the needs and differences of others. This definition highlights the fact that diversity programs include and are meant for everyone. Diversity is much more likely to be successful when we see it as everyone’s business than when we believe it helps only certain groups of employees.

attracting, Selecting, Developing, and Retaining Diverse Employees One method of enhancing workforce diversity is to target recruitment messages to specific demographic groups that are underrepresented in the workforce. This means placing advertisements in publications geared toward those groups; pairing with colleges, universities, and other institutions with significant numbers of underrepresented minorities, as Microsoft is doing to encourage women into technology studies;96 and forming partnerships with associations like the Society of Women Engineers or the National Minority Supplier Devel- opment Council.

Research has shown that women and minorities have greater interest in employers that make special efforts to highlight a commitment to diversity in their recruiting materials. Diversity advertisements that fail to show women and minorities in positions of organizational leadership send a negative message about the diversity climate at an organization.97 Of course, to show the pictures, organizations must actually have diversity in their management ranks

2-6 Describe how organizations manage diversity effectively. diversity management The process and programs by which managers make everyone more aware of and sensitive to the needs and differences of others.

nine Basic physical abilitiesExhibit 2-3

Strength Factors

1. Dynamic strength Ability to exert muscular force repeatedly or continuously over time

2. Trunk strength Ability to exert muscular strength using the trunk (particularly abdominal) muscles

3. Static strength Ability to exert force against external objects 4. Explosive strength Ability to expend a maximum of energy in one or a series of

explosive acts

Flexibility Factors

5. Extent flexibility Ability to move the trunk and back muscles as far as possible 6. Dynamic flexibility Ability to make rapid, repeated flexing movements

Other Factors

7. Body coordination Ability to coordinate the simultaneous actions of different parts of the body

8. Balance Ability to maintain equilibrium despite forces pulling off balance

9. Stamina Ability to continue maximum effort requiring prolonged effort over time

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 61

Some companies have been actively working toward recruiting less- represented groups. Etsy, an online retailer, hosts engineering classes and provides grants for aspiring women coders, and then hires the best.98 McKinsey & Co., Bain & Co., Boston Consulting Group, and Goldman Sachs have similarly been actively recruiting women who left the workforce to start families by offering phase-in programs and other benefits.99

The selection process is one of the most important places to apply diversity efforts. Managers who hire need to value fairness and objectivity in selecting employees and focus on the productive potential of new recruits. When manag- ers use a well-defined protocol for assessing applicant talent and the organization clearly prioritizes nondiscrimination policies, qualifications become far more important in determining who gets hired than demographic characteristics.100

Individuals who are demographically different from their coworkers may be more likely to feel low commitment and to leave, but a positive diversity climate can aid retention. Many diversity training programs are available to employers, and research efforts are focusing on identifying the most effective initiatives. It seems that the best programs are inclusive in both their design and implementa- tion.101 A positive diversity climate should be the goal since all workers appear to prefer an organization that values diversity.

Diversity in groups Most contemporary workplaces require extensive work in group settings. When people work in groups, they need to establish a common way of looking at and accomplishing the major tasks, and they need to communicate with one an- other often. If they feel little sense of membership and cohesion in their groups, all group attributes are likely to suffer.

In some cases, diversity in traits can hurt team performance, whereas in oth- ers it can facilitate performance.102 Whether diverse or homogeneous teams are more effective depends on the characteristic of interest. Demographic diversity (in gender, race, and ethnicity) does not appear to either help or hurt team performance in general, although racial diversity in management groups may increase organizational performance in the right conditions.103

Developing the talents of women is a strategic diversity imperative for business success at Nissan Motor Company in Japan. Attracted by Nissan’s commitment to equality for women in the workplace and to developing their careers, Li Ning of China decided to join the company after graduating from Tokyo University. Sources: Franck Robichon/EPA/Newscom

62 PART 2 The Individual

Teams of individuals who are highly intelligent, conscientious, and inter- ested in working in team settings are more effective. Thus, diversity on these variables is likely to be a bad thing—it makes little sense to try to form teams that mix in members who are lower in intelligence or conscientiousness, and who are uninterested in teamwork. In other cases, diversity can be a strength. Groups of individuals with different types of expertise and education are more effective than homogeneous groups. Similarly, a group made entirely of asser- tive people who want to be in charge, or a group whose members all prefer to follow the lead of others, will be less effective than a group that mixes leaders and followers.

Regardless of the composition of the group, differences can be leveraged to achieve superior performance. The most important factor is to emphasize the similarities among members.104 Managers who emphasize higher-order goals and values in their leadership style are more effective in managing diverse teams.105

Effective Diversity programs Organizations use a variety of diversity programs in recruiting and selection policies, as well as training and development practices. Effective, comprehen- sive workforce programs encouraging diversity have three distinct components. First, they teach managers about the legal framework for equal employment op- portunity and encourage fair treatment of all people regardless of their demo- graphic characteristics. Second, they teach managers how a diverse workforce will be better able to serve a diverse market of customers and clients. Third, they foster personal development practices that bring out the skills and abilities of all workers, acknowledging how differences in perspective can be a valuable way to improve performance for everyone.106

Most negative reactions to employment discrimination are based on the idea that discriminatory treatment is unfair. Regardless of race or gender, people are generally in favor of diversity-oriented programs, including affirmative action

Employees of Grow Financial Credit Union in Tampa, Florida, enjoy a lunch- hour program on women executives and their careers sponsored by the firm’s diversity committee. Reflecting Grow’s diverse employee mix, the diversity programs foster the skills, abilities, personal development, and performance of all employees. Sources: Cherie Diez/ZUMA Press/Newscom

Diversity in  Organizations CHAPTER 2 63

programs (AAP), to increase the representation of minority groups and ensure everyone a fair opportunity to show their skills and abilities.

Organizational leaders should examine their workforce to determine whether target groups have been underutilized. If groups of employees are not proportionally represented in top management, managers should look for any hidden barriers to advancement. Managers can often improve recruit- ing practices, make selection systems more transparent, and provide train- ing for those employees who have not had adequate exposure to diversity material in the past. The organization should also clearly communicate its policies to employees so they can understand how and why certain practices are followed. Communications should focus as much as possible on qualifi- cations and job performance; emphasizing certain groups as needing more assistance could backfire.

Finally, research indicates a tailored approach will be needed for interna- tional organizations. For instance, a case study of the multinational Finnish company TRANSCO found it was possible to develop a consistent global phi- losophy for diversity management. However, differences in legal and cultural factors across nations forced the company to develop unique policies to match the cultural and legal frameworks of each country in which it operated.107

try It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: Human Resources and Diversity.

Summary This chapter looked at diversity from many perspectives. We paid particular attention to three variables—biographical characteristics, abilities, and diversity programs. Diversity management must be an ongoing commitment that crosses all levels of the organization. Policies to improve the climate for diversity can be effective, and diversity management can be learned.

Implications for Managers ●● Understand your organization’s anti-discrimination policies thoroughly

and share them with all employees. ●● Assess and challenge your stereotype beliefs to increase your objectivity. ●● Look beyond readily observable biographical characteristics and consider

the individual’s capabilities before making management decisions; remain open and encouraging for individuals to disclose any hidden disabilities.

●● Fully evaluate what accommodations a person with disabilities will need and then fine-tune a job to that person’s abilities.

●● Seek to understand and respect the unique biographical characteris- tics of each individual; a fair but individualistic approach yields the best performance.

64 PART 2 The Individual

affirmative action Programs Have Outlived their Usefulness

U.s. supreme Court Justice sonia sotomayor is arguably the court’s strongest supporter of affirmative action . . . in theory. In a recent case upholding the michigan ban on affirmative action for underrepresented races in state university admission prac- tices, Justice sotomayor refused to use the term. “affirmative action,” she said, has the connotation of “intentional preferential treatment based on race alone.” yes, it does. Isn’t that the point?

affirmative action programs (aaP) were needed to get the process of workplace diversity started, but that was all a long time ago. The prac- tice, now outlawed in arizona, California, Florida, michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, oklahoma, and Washington, raises the percentage of minority individuals but does not create a positive diversity climate. Here’s why:

●● Affirmative action lowers the standards for everyone by shifting the criteria for hiring from experience, education, and abilities to quotas based on race or other non-performance attributes. Performance standards for the organization are then effectively lowered. Groups not helped by the initiative will be resentful, which can lead to workplace discrimination. Individuals “helped” into the organization also suffer from perceptions of low self-competence (“I don’t know if I would have made it here if not for aaP”) and stereotype threat (“I’m afraid others can’t see me as competent because I was let in by the aaP”).

●● Research indicates that minorities are not helped by AAP in pur- suing higher education. In fact, a large-scale study showed that minority law students who attended schools best matched to their lsaT scores performed better than those who went to higher-ranked schools than their scores would warrant without affirmative action.

●● Some of the world’s AAPs have resulted in strife. For example, sri lanka has suffered from civil wars partially caused by affirmative action that further polarized the Tamils and shinalese. In africa, the quota system to help blacks created a climate of race entitle- ment and marginalization of Indians. In fact, most countries have struggled with issues arising from affirmative action policies.

affirmative action has outlived its usefulness in creating diversity, and it’s time to create true equality by focusing on merit-based achievements.

POInt

A ffirmative action was enacted to ensure equality, and it’s still needed today. When the United states was considering the issue for black minorities back in 1965, President lyndon B. Johnson said, “you do not take a person who, for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring him up to the starting line of a race and then say, ‘you are free to compete with all the others,’ and still justly believe that you have been completely fair.” Dr. martin luther agreed that, in order to create equal opportunity, proactive measures are needed as long as some people remain at a disadvantage. Therefore, what we should be asking is: are minority groups faring as well as major- ity groups in the United states? No, not by any indicator.

south africa has affirmative action for blacks through the equal employment act; China has “preferential policies” that require ethnic minorities and women be appointed to top government positions; Israel has a class-based affirmative action policy to promote women, arabs, blacks, and people with disabilities; India has a policy of reservation, a form of affirmative action, for under-represented castes; sri lanka has the standardization affirmative action policy to help those in areas with lower rates of education; malaysia’s New economic Policy (NeP) provides advantage for the majority group, the malays, who have lower income; Brazil, Finland, France, New Zealand, and romania have edu- cation aaPs; Germany’s Basic law has aaPs for women and those with handicaps; russia has quotas for women and ethnic minorities; and Canada’s employment equity act provides affirmative action to women, the disabled, aboriginal people, and visible minorities.

To be certain, fairness is in the eye of the beholder. affirmative action provides opportunity, but then it is up to the individual to meet the expec- tations of schools or employers. as blogger Berneta Haynes wrote, “I’m not ashamed to admit that without affirmative action, I’m not certain I would be on the precipice of the law career that I’m at right now. as an african- american woman from a poor family, I have little doubt that affirmative action helped me get into college, earn a degree, and enroll in law school.”

If we change anything about affirmative action, we should expand the program until the achievements of underserved groups fully match those of long-overprivileged groups.

COunterPOInt

Sources: D. Desilver, “supreme Court says states Can Ban affirmative action: 8 already Have,” Pew research Center Thinktank (april 22, 2014), http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/04/22/supreme-court-says-states-can-ban-affirmative- action-8-already-have/; B. Haynes, “affirmative action Helped me,” Inside Higher Ed (march 12, 2013), www.insidehighered. com/views/2013/03/12/affirmative-action-helped-me-and-benefits-society-essay; D. leonhardt, “rethinking affirmative action,” The New York Times (october 13, 2012), www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/sunday-review/rethinking-affirmative- action.html?pagewanted=all; l. m. leslie, D. m. mayer, and D. a. Kravitz, “The stigma of affirmative action: a stereotyping- Based Theory and meta-analytic Test of the Consequences for Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 4 (2014): 964–89; and B. Zimmer, “affirmative action’s Hazy Definitions,” The Wall Street Journal (april 26–27, 2014), C4. With help from Wikipedia.

Diversity in Organizations CHAPTER 2 65

cHaPter review

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QUestiOns fOr review

2-1 What are the two major forms of workplace diversity?

2-2 How does workplace discrimination undermine organizational effectiveness?

2-3 How are the key biographical characteristics relevant to OB?

2-4 How do other differentiating characteristics factor into OB?

2-5 What are the relevant points of intellectual and physical abilities to organizational behavior?

2-6 How can organizations manage diversity effectively?

exPerientiaL exercise Differences The instructor randomly assigns the class into groups of four. It is important that group membership is truly ran- domly decided, not done by seating, friendships, or prefer- ences. Without discussion, each group member first answers the following question on paper:

2-7. How diverse is your group, on a scale of 1–10, where 1 = very dissimilar and 10 = very similar?

Putting that paper away, each person shares with the group his or her answers to the following questions:

• What games/toys did you like to play with when you were young?

• What do you consider to be your most sacred value (and why)?

• Are you spiritual at all? • Tell us a little about your family. • Where’s your favorite place on earth and why?

Each group member then answers the following question on paper:

2-8. How diverse is your group, on a scale of 1–10, where 1 = very dissimilar and 10 = very similar?

After groups calculate the average ratings from before and after the discussion, they will share with the class the dif- ference between their averages and answer the following questions:

2-9. Did your personal rating increase after the discus- sion time? Did your group’s average ratings increase after the discussion time?

2-10. Do you think that if you had more time for discus- sion, your group’s average rating would increase?

2-11. What do you see as the role of surface-level diversity and deep-level diversity in a group’s acceptance of individual differences?

That women are underrepresented on boards of direc- tors is an understatement. In the European Union (EU), only 9.7 percent of the directors of the 300 largest com- panies are women. Among the 100 largest companies in Great Britain, women accounted for 34 percent of board appointments. In the United States, only 16 percent of

etHicaL DiLemma Getting More Women on Board board members among the Fortune 500 are women. In China and India, the number is roughly half that.

In response to such underrepresentation, many coun- tries have enacted laws and guidelines. Norway was the first to require boards to be at least 40 percent women in all publicly held companies and 450 LLCs in the private sector.

66 PART 2 The Individual

Spain also requires boards to be 40 percent women by 2016, and France says corporate boards of listed companies must be 40 percent female by 2017. Belgium, the Netherlands, Iceland, and Italy have similar “pink quotas” in place, and Sweden is recommending 50 percent representation.

Questions 2-12. Given that women participate in the labor force

in roughly the same proportion as men, why do

you think women occupy so few seats on boards of directors?

2-13. Do you agree with the quotas established in many countries? Why or why not?

2-14. Beyond legal remedies, what do you think can be done to increase women’s representation on boards of directors?

Sources: J. Galbreath, “Are There Gender-Related Influences on Corporate Sustainability? A Study of Women on Boards of Directors,” Journal of Management & Organization 17, no. 1 (2011): 17–38; L. Turner and A. Suflas, “Global Diversity—One Program Won’t Fit All,” HR Magazine, May 2014, 59–61; and J. S. Lublin, “ ‘Pink Quotas’ Alter Europe’s Boards,” The Wall Street Journal, September 12, 2012, B8.

Do you want to work for Google? In some ways, who wouldn’t? Sunny California, fabulous campus, free organic meals, perks galore . . . oh, and challenging work with some of the brightest minds in the field. By all accounts, Google is a class act, a symbol of modernization.

Does Google want you to work for it? Ah, that is the question. Eric Schmidt, a former Google CEO, and Jon- athan Rosenberg, a former Google senior product man- ager, say Google searches for a certain type of person: a “smart creative.” They say smart creatives are “a new kind of animal”—and the secret ingredient to Google’s success.

Do you think you are a smart creative? Are you an im- patient, outspoken, risk taker who is easily bored? Do you change jobs frequently? Are you intellectually flexible? Do you have technical know-how, business knowledge, and creativity? Do you think analytically? According to Schmidt and Rosenberg, answering yes to these questions makes you a smart creative. As you can see, being a smart creative is not all positive. But it will get you hired at Google.

One last question: Are you male or female? Google may be a symbol of the modernization of the workplace, but perhaps not of the workforce. The Google workforce, with 48,600 individuals, is a man’s world—70 percent male overall. On the technical side, a full 83 percent of the engi- neering employees are male. In the management ranks, 79 percent of the managers are male. On the executive level, only three of the company’s 36 executives are women.

Google officials say they are aware of the lack of diver- sity, but that their diversity initiatives have failed. However, others report that sexist comments go unchecked and there is a frat-house atmosphere. In fact, an interviewer at

case inciDent 1 Walking the Walk an all-company presentation insultingly teased a man and woman who shared an office, asking them, “Which one of you does the dishes?”

Thankfully, Google has begun to put its smart cre- atives to work on new thoughts about diversity. With the help of social psychology research, the company sent all employees through training on unconscious bias—our reflexive tendency to be biased toward our own groups— to force people to consider their racist and sexist mindsets. So far, the training seems to be making a bigger difference than former initiatives, but the firm has a long way to go. Laszlo Bock, Google’s top HR executive, said, “Suddenly you go from being completely oblivious to going, ‘Oh my god, it’s everywhere.’”

Critics are skeptical that Google and other large technology firms will ever count women in their ranks in numbers that reflect the population, though research con- tinues to indicate that men and women are highly similar employees. Once Google has achieved greater diversity than it currently has, perhaps its executives can begin to work on the pay differentials: a recent Harvard study indi- cated that women computer scientists receive 89 percent of the pay men earn for the same jobs.

Questions 2-15. Does this article change your perception of Google

as an employer? How? 2-16. Why do you think men at Google continue to hire

mainly men? 2-17. Would you do anything to address diversity issues at

Google if you worked there? What might you try?

Sources: S. Goldenberg, “Exposing Hidden Bias at Google,” The New York Times, September 25, 2014, B1, B9; S. Lohr, “The Google Formula for Success,” The New York Times, September 29, 2014, B8; N. Wingfield, “Microsoft Chief Backpedals on Women’s Pay,” The New York Times, October 10, 2014, B7–B8; and E. Zell, Z. Krizan, and S. R. Teeter, “Evaluating Gender Similarities and Differences Us- ing Metasynthesis,” American Psychologist 70 (2015): 10–20.

Diversity in Organizations CHAPTER 2 67

Over the past century, the average age of the workforce has increased as medical science has continued to enhance longevity and vitality. As we discussed in this chapter, many individuals will work past the previously established ages of retirement, and the fastest-growing segment of the work- force is individuals over the age of 55.

Unfortunately, older workers face a variety of discrimi- natory attitudes in the workplace. Researchers scanned more than 100 publications on age discrimination to de- termine what types of age stereotypes were most prevalent across studies. They found that stereotypes inferred that older workers are lower performers. Research, on the oth- er hand, indicates they are not, and organizations are real- izing the benefits of this needed employee group.

Dale Sweere, HR director for engineering firm Stanley Consultants, is one of the growing number of manage- ment professionals actively recruiting the older workforce. Sweere says older workers “typically hit the ground run- ning much quicker and they fit into the organization well.” They bring to the job a higher skill level earned through years of experience, remember an industry’s history, and know the aging customer base.

Tell that to the older worker who is unemployed. Older workers have long been sought by government contrac- tors, financial firms, and consultants, according to Cor- nelia Gamlem, president of consulting firm GEMS Group Ltd., and she actively recruits them. However, the U.S. Bu- reau of Labor Statistics reports that the average job search for an unemployed worker over age 55 is 56 weeks, versus 38 weeks for the rest of the unemployed population.

Enter the encore career, a.k.a. unretirement. Increas- ingly, older workers who aren’t finding fulfilling positions are seeking to opt out of traditional roles. After long ca- reers in the workforce, an increasing number are embrac- ing flexible, work-from-home options such as customer

case inciDent 2 The Encore Career service positions. For instance, Olga Howard, 71, signed on as an independent contractor for 25–30 hours per week with Arise Virtual Solutions, handling questions for a fi- nancial software company after her long-term career end- ed. Others are starting up new businesses. Chris Farrell, author of Unretirement, said, “Older people are starting businesses more than any other age group.” Others funnel into nonprofit organizations, where the pay may not equal the individual’s previous earning power, but the mission is strong. “They need the money and the meaning,” said En- core.org CEO Marc Freedman. Still others are gaining ad- ditional education, such as Japan’s “silver entrepreneurs,” who have benefited from the country’s tax credits for train- ing older workers.

Individuals who embark on a second-act career often report they are very fulfilled. However, the loss of workers from their longstanding careers may be undesirable. “In this knowledge economy, the retention of older workers gives employers a competitive edge by allowing them to continue to tap a generation of knowledge and skill,” said Mark Schmit, executive director of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) Foundation. “New think- ing by HR professionals and employers will be required to recruit and retain them. Otherwise, organizations’ great- est asset will walk out the door.”

Questions 2-18. What changes in employment relationships are

likely to occur as the population ages? 2-19. Do you think increasing age diversity will create

new challenges for managers? What types of challenges do you expect will be most profound?

2-20. How can organizations cope with differences related to age discrimination in the workplace? How can older employees help?

Sources: N. Eberstadt and M. W. Hodin, “America Needs to Rethink ‘Retirement,” The Wall Street Jour- nal, March 11, 2014, A15; S. Giegerich, “Older Job-Seekers Must Take Charge, Adapt,” Chicago Tribune, September 10, 2012, 2–3; R. J. Grossman, “Encore!” HR Magazine, July 2014, 27–31; T. Lytle, “Benefits for Older Workers,” HR Magazine, March 2012, 53–58; G. Norman, “Second Acts After 65,” The Wall Street Journal, September 24, 2014, A13; D. Stipp, “The Anti-Aging Revolution,” Fortune, June 14, 2010, 124–30; R. A. Posthuma and M. A. Campion, “Age Stereotypes in the Workplace: Common Stereo- types, Moderators, and Future Research Directions,” Journal of Management 35 (2009): 158–88; and P. Sullivan, “Older, They Turn a Phone Into a Job,” The New York Times, March 25, 2014, F3.

68 PART 2 The Individual

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

2-21. In relation to this chapter’s Ethical Dilemma, one recent study found no link between female representation on boards of directors and these companies’ corporate sustainability or environmental policies. The study’s author expressed surprise at the findings. Do the findings surprise you? Why or why not?

2-22. Now that you’ve read the chapter and Case Incident 2, do you think organizations should work harder to retain and hire older workers? Why or why not?

2-23. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

enDnOtes 1 M. Toossi, “A Century of Change: The U.S. Labor Force, 1950–2050,” Bureau of Labor Sta- tistics, May 2002, www.bls.gov/opub/2002/05/ art2full.pdf. 2 U.S. Census Bureau, DataFerrett, Current Population Survey, December 2014; S. Ricker, “The Changing Face of U.S. Jobs,” Career- Builder, March 26, 2015, www.thehiringsite .careerbuilder.com/2015/03/26/9-findings- diversity-americas-workforce. 3 L. Colley, “Not Codgers in Cardigans! Female Workforce Participation and Ageing Public Services,” Gender Work and Organization, May 2013, 327–48; and M. DiNatale and S. Boraas, “The Labor Force Experience of Women from Generation X,” Monthly Labor Review, March 2002, 1–15. 4 W. H. Frey, Diversity Explosion (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 2014). 5 M. Toossi, “Labor Force Projections to 2020: A More Slowly Growing Workforce,” Bureau of Labor Statistics, January 2012, www.bls.gov/ opub/mlr/2012/01/art3full.pdf. 6 C. T. Kulik, “Spotlight on the Context: How a Stereotype Threat Framework Might Help Organizations to Attract and Retain Older Workers,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7, no. 3 (2014): 456–61. 7 A. H. Eagly and J. L. Chin, “Are Mem- berships in Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Categories Merely Surface Characteristics?” American Psychologist 65 (2010): 934–35. 8 W. J. Casper, J. H. Wayne, and J. G. Mane- gold, “Who Will We Recruit? Targeting Deep- and Surface-Level Diversity with Human Resource Policy Advertising,” Human Resource Management 52, no. 3 (2013): 311–32. 9 C. T. Kulik, “Spotlight on the Context: How a Stereotype Framework Might Help Organi- zations to Attract and Retain Older Workers.” 10 R. Melloy and S. Liu, “Nontraditional Employment History: A Less Obvious Source of Stereotype Threat,” Industrial and Organiza- tional Psychology 7, no. 3 (2014): 461–66. 11 E. J. Kenny and R. B. Briner, “Stereotype Threat and Minority Ethnic Employees: What

Should Our Research Priorities Be?” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7, no. 3 (2014): 425–29. 12 C. T. Kulik, “Spotlight on the Context: How a Stereotype Threat Might Help Organizations to Attract and Retain Older Workers.” 13 J. H. Carlson and J. D. Seacat, “Multiple Threat: Overweight/Obese Women in the Workforce,” and B. J. Casad and S. M. Mer- ritt, “The Importance of Stereotype Threat Mechanisms in Workplace Outcomes,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7, no. 3 (2014): 413–18. 14 G. Czukor and M. Bayazit, “Casting a Wide Net? Performance Deficit, Priming, and Subjective Performance Evaluation in Organizational Stereotype Threat Research,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7, no. 3 (2014): 409–12; K. S. Jones and N. C. Car- penter, “Toward a Sociocultural Psychological Approach to Examining Stereotype Threat in the Workplace,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7, no. 3 (2014): 429–32; and C. T. Kulik, “Spotlight on the Context: How a Stereotype Threat Framework Might Help Organizations to Attract and Retain Older Workers.” 15 L. M. Cortina, “Unseen Injustice: Incivil- ity as Modern Discrimination in Organiza- tions,” Academy of Management Review 33, no. 1 (2008): 55–75; and C. M. Harold and B. C. Holtz, “The Effects of Passive Leadership on Workplace Incivility,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, January 2015, 16–38. 16 J. P. Jamieson, K. Koslov, M. K. Nock, and W. B. Mendes, “Experiencing Discrimination Increases Risk Taking,” Psychological Science 24, no. 2 (2012): 131–39. 17 C. T. Kulik, S. Ryan, S. Harper, and G. George, “Aging Populations and Manage- ment,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 4 (2014): 929–35. 18 T. Lytle, “Benefits for Older Workers,” HR Magazine, March 2012, 53–58. 19 A. Tergesen, “Why Everything You Know about Aging is Probably Wrong,” The Wall

Street Journal, December 1, 2014, B1–B2. 20 L. Turner and A. Suflas, “Global Diversity— One Program Won’t Fit All,” HR Magazine, May 2014, 59–61. 21 L. Weber, “Americans Rip Up Retirement Plans,” The Wall Street Journal, January 31, 2013, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000 1424127887323926104578276241741448064 .html. 22 M. Chand and R. L. Tung, “The Aging of the World’s Population and Its Effects on Global Business,” Academy of Management Perspectives 28, no. 4 (2014): 409–29. 23 S. Shellenbarger, “Work & Family Mailbox,” The Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2014, D2. 24 N. E. Wolfson, T. M. Cavanaugh, and K. Kraiger, “Older Adults and Technology-Based Instruction: Optimizing Learning Outcomes and Transfer,” Academy of Management Learning & Education 13, no. 1 (2014): 26-44. 25 T. W. H. Ng and D. C. Feldman, “Re-examining the Relationship between Age and Voluntary Turnover,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 74 (2009): 283–94. 26 T. W. H. Ng and D. C. Feldman, “The Relationship of Age to Ten Dimensions of Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93 (2008): 392–423. 27 T. W. H. Ng and D. C. Feldman, “Evaluat- ing Six Common Stereotypes about Older Workers with Meta-Analytical Data,” Personnel Psychology 65 (2012): 821–58. 28 A. Tergesen, “Why Everything You Know about Aging Is Probably Wrong.” 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid. 31 Ibid. 32 T. W. H. Ng and D. C. Feldman, “The Relationship of Age with Job Attitudes: A Meta-Analysis,” Personnel Psychology 63 (2010): 677–718. 33 E. Zell, Z. Krizan, and S. R. Teeter, “Evaluat- ing Gender Similarities and Differences Using Metasynthesis,” American Psychologist 70, no. 1 (2015): 10–20.

Diversity in Organizations CHAPTER 2 69

34 J. B. Allendorfer et al., “Females and Males Are Highly Similar in Language Performance and Cortical Activation Patterns During Verb Generation,” Cortex 48, no. 9 (2012): 1218–33; and A. Ardilla, M. Rosselli, E. Matute, and O. Inozemtseva, “Gender Differences in Cogni- tive Development,” Developmental Psychology 47, no. 4 (2011): 984–90. 35 P. L. Roth, K. L. Purvis, and P. Bobko, “A Meta-Analysis of Gender Group Differ- ences for Measures of Job Performance in Field Studies,” Journal of Management, March 2012, 719–39. 36 S. C. Paustian-Underdahl, L. S. Walker, and D. J. Woehr, “Gender and Perceptions of Leadership Effectiveness: A Meta-Analysis of Contextual Moderators,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 6 (2014): 1129–45. 37 R. E. Silverman, “Study Suggests Fix for Gender Bias on the Job,” The Wall Street Journal, January 9, 2013, D4. 38 A. J. Koch, S. D. D’Mello, and P. R. Sackett, “A Meta-Analysis of Gender Stereotypes and Bias in Experimental Simulations of Employ- ment Decision Making,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 128–61. 39 E. B. King et al., “Benevolent Sexism at Work: Gender Differences in the Distribution of Challenging Developmental Experiences,” Journal of Management, November 2012, 1835–66. 40 L. Gartzia, M. K. Ryan, N. Balluerka, and A. Aritzeta, “Think Crisis-Think Female: Further Evidence,” European Journal of Work and Organi- zational Psychology 21, no. 4 (2014): 603–28. 41 P. Wechsler, “58 women CFOs in the Fortune 500: Is This progress?” For- tune, February 24, 2015, http://fortune .com/2015/02/24/58-women-cfos-in-the- fortune-500-is-this-progress/. 42 A. Damast, “She Works Hard for Less Money,” Bloomberg Businessweek, December 24, 2012–January 6, 2013, 31–32. 43 B. Casselman, “Male Nurses Earn More,” The Wall Street Journal, February 26, 2013, A2. 44 M. A. Belliveau, “Engendering Inequity? How Social Accounts Create vs. Merely Explain Unfavorable Pay Outcomes for Women,” Organization Science, July–August 2012, 1154–74. 45 A. J. C. Cuddy, “Increasingly, Juries are Taking the Side of Women Who Face Workplace Discrimination,” Harvard Business Review, September 2012, 95–100. 46 J. M. Hoobler, G. Lemmon, and S. J. Wayne, “Women’s Managerial Aspirations: An Organi- zational Development Perspective,” Journal of Management 40, no. 3 (2014): 703–30. 47 J. I. Hancock, D. G. Allen, F. A. Bosco, K. R. McDaniel, and C. A. Pierce, “Meta-Analytic Review of Employee Turnover as a Predictor of Firm Performance,” Journal of Management, March 2013, 573–603.

48 L. Turner and A. Suflas, “Global Diversity— One Program Won’t Fit All.” 49 Ibid. 50 G. N. Powell and D. A. Butterfield, “Explor- ing the Influence of Decision Makers’ Race and Gender on Actual Promotions to Top Management,” Personnel Psychology 55, no. 2 (2002): 397–428. 51 T. Vega, “With Diversity Still Lacking, Indus- try Focuses on Retention,” The New York Times, September 4, 2012, B3. 52 D. R. Avery, P. F. McKay, and D. C. Wilson “What Are the Odds? How Demographic Similarity Affects the Prevalence of Perceived Employment Discrimination,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93 (2008): 235–49. 53 J. M. Sacco, C. R. Scheu, A. M. Ryan, and N. Schmitt, “An Investigation of Race and Sex Similarity Effects in Interviews: A Multilevel Approach to Relational Demography,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 5 (2003): 852–65; and P. F. McKay and M. A. McDaniel, “A Reexamination of Black-White Mean Differ- ences in Work Performance: More Data, More Moderators,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 3 (2006): 538–54. 54 S. Mullainathan, “The Measuring Sticks of Racial Bias,” The New York Times, January 4, 2015, 6. 55 B. R. Ragins, J. A. Gonzalez, K. Ehrhardt, and R. Singh, “Crossing the Threshold: The Spillover of Community Racial Diversity and Diversity Climate to the Workplace,” Personnel Psychology 65 (2012): 755–87. 56 P. F. McKay, D. R. Avery, and M. A. Morris, “Mean Racial-Ethnic Differences in Employee Sales Performance: The Moderating Role of Diversity Climate,” Personnel Psychology 61, no. 2 (2008): 349–74. 57 D. R. Avery, J. A. Richeson, M R. Hebl, and N. Ambady, “It Does Not Have to Be Uncomfortable: The Role of Behavioral Scripts in Black-White Interracial Interac- tions,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94 (2009): 1382–93. 58 L. Turner and A. Suflas, “Global Diversity— One Program Won’t Fit All.” 59 Information on the Americans with Disabili- ties Act can be found on their website at www .ada.gov, accessed July 28, 2015. 60 S. G. Goldberg, M. B. Killeen, and B. O’Day, “The Disclosure Conundrum: How People with Psychiatric Disabilities Navigate Employment,” Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 11, no. 3 (2005): 463–500; and M. L. Ellison, Z. Russinova, K. L. MacDonald- Wilson, and A. Lyass, “Patterns and Correlates of Workplace Disclosure among Professionals and Managers with Psychiatric Conditions,” Journal of Vocational Rehabilita- tion 18, no. 1 (2003): 3–13. 61 B. S. Bell and K. J. Klein, “Effect of Dis- ability, Gender, and Job Level on Ratings of

Job Applicants,” Rehabilitation Psychology 46, no. 3 (2001): 229–46; and E. Louvet, “Social Judgment Toward Job Applicants with Dis- abilities: Perception of Personal Qualities and Competences,” Rehabilitation Psychology 52, no. 3 (2007): 297–303. 62 L. R. Ren, R. L. Paetzold, and A. Colella, “A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies on the Effects of Disability on Human Resource Judgments,” Human Resource Management Review 18, no. 3 (2008): 191–203. 63 S. Almond and A. Healey, “Mental Health and Absence from Work: New Evidence from the UK Quarterly Labour Force Survey,” Work, Employment, and Society 17, no. 4 (2003): 731–42. 64 P. T. J. H. Nelissen, K. Vornholt, G. M. C. Van Ruitenbeek, U. R. Hulsheger, and S. Uit- dewilligen, “Disclosure or Nondisclosure—Is This the Question?” Industrial and Organiza- tional Psychology 7 (2014): 231–35. 65 A. M. Santuzzi, P. R. Waltz, and L. M. Finkelstein, “Invisible Disabilities: Unique Challenges for Employees and Organiza- tions,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7 (2014): 204–19. 66 Ibid. 67 R. A. Schriber, R. W. Robins, and M. Solomon, “Personality and Self-Insight in Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 106, no. 1 (2014): 112–30. 68 C. L. Nittrouer, R. C. E. Trump, K. R. O’Brien, and M. Hebl, “Stand Up and Be Counted: In the Long Run, Disclosing Helps All,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 7 (2014): 235–41. 69 T. W. H. Ng and D. C. Feldman, “Organiza- tional Tenure and Job Performance,” Journal of Management 36 (2010): 1220–50. 70 L. Turner and A. Suflas, “Global Diversity— One Program Won’t Fit All.” 71 T. Audi, “A New Mosque Rises in Anchorage,” The Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2014, A5. 72 E. B. King and A. S. Ahmad, “An Experi- mental Field Study of Interpersonal Discrimi- nation Toward Muslim Job Applicants,” Personnel Psychology 63 (2010): 881–906. 73 A. Liptak, “In a Case of Religious Dress, Justices Explore the Obligations of Employ- ers,” The New York Times (February 25, 2015), http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/26/us/ in-a-case-of-religious-dress-justices-explore- the-obligations-of-employers.html?ref= topics&_r=2. 74 A. Tilcsik, “Pride and Prejudice: Employ- ment Discrimination against Openly Gay Men in the United States,” American Journal of Sociol- ogy 117 (2011): 586–626. 75 J. Browne, “What One CEO Learned by Being Outed,” The Wall Street Journal, June 7–8, 2014, C3.

70 PART 2 The Individual

76 “Facts about Discrimination in Federal Government Employment Based on Marital Status, Political Affiliation, Status as a Parent, Sexual Orientation, or Transgender (Gender Identity) Status,” U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2013), www.eeoc .gov/federal/otherprotections.cfm. 77 L. Turner and A. Suflas, “Global Diversity— One Program Won’t Fit All.” 78 V. Priola, D. Lasio, S. De Simone, and F. Serri, “The Sound of Silence: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Discrimination in ‘Inclusive Organizations’,” British Journal of Management 25 (2012): 488–502. 79 “Sex-Based Discrimination,” U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 2013, www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sex.cfm. 80 M. Keisling, “No Longer at Zero: An Update on ENDA,” Huffington Post, March 13, 2013, www.huffingtonpost.com/mara-keisling/no- longer-at-zero-an-upda_b_2861885.html; and J. Pike, “One-Year Anniversary of Senate ENDA Passage,” Human Rights Campaign, November 7, 2014, http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/ one-year-anniversary-of-senate-enda-passage), accessed March 26, 2015. 81 C. Burns, “The Costly Business of Discrimi- nation,” Center for American Progress, March 2012, www.scribd.com/doc/81214767/ The-Costly-Business-of-Discrimination. 82 HRC Corporate Equality Index, 2015, http://hrc-assets.s3-website-us-east-1 .amazonaws.com//files/documents/

CEI-2015-rev.pdf#__utma=149406063.156 2509373.1426273478.1426273478.142627 3478.1&__utmb=149406063.1.10.1426273 478&__utmc=149406063&__utmx=-&__ut mz=149406063.1426273478.1.1.utmcsr=go ogle|utmccn=(organic)|utmcmd=organic| utmctr=(not%20provided)&__utmv=-&__ utmk=167575230". 83 P. Levy, “Does the Hobby Lobby Decision Threaten Gay Rights?” Newsweek, July 9, 2014, http://www.newsweek.com/does-hobby-lobby- decision-threaten-gay-rights-258098. 84 V. Priola, D. Lasio, S. De Simone, and F. Serri, “The Sound of Silence: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Discrimination in ‘Inclusive Organizations’.” 85 P. A. Freund and N. Kasten, “How Smart Do You Think You Are? A Meta-Analysis of the Validity of Self-Estimates of Cognitive Ability,” Psychological Bulletin 138 (2012): 296–321. 86 R. E. Nisbett et al., “Intelligence: New Find- ings and Theoretical Developments,” American Psychologist, February–March 2012, 130–59. 87 L. S. Gottfredson, “The Challenge and Promise of Cognitive Career Assessment,” Journal of Career Assessment 11, no. 2 (2003), pp. 115–135. 88 M. D. Dunnette and E. A. Fleishman (eds.), Human Performance and Productivity: Human Capability Assessment (New York and London: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis Group, 2014).

89 J. W. B. Lang, M. Kersting, U. R. Hülsche- ger, and J. Lang, “General Mental Ability, Narrower Cognitive Abilities, and Job Perfor- mance: The Perspective of the Nested-Factors Model of Cognitive Abilities” Personnel Psychol- ogy 63 (2010): 595–640. 90 N. Barber, “Educational and Ecological Cor- relates of IQ: A Cross-National Investigation,” Intelligence, May–June 2005, 273–84. 91 M. E. Beier and F. L. Oswald, “Is Cogni- tive Ability a Liability? A Critique and Future Research Agenda on Skilled Performance,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 18 (2012): 331–45. 92 “What Companies Will Make You Take a Wonderlic Test?” Beat the Wonderlic, Decem- ber 31, 2014, http://www.beatthewonderlic .com/blog/2014/12/31/what-companies-will- make-you-take-a-wonderlic-test. 93 Y. Ganzach, “Intelligence and Job Satisfac- tion,” Academy of Management Journal 41, no. 5 (1998): 526–39; and Y. Ganzach, “Intel- ligence, Education, and Facets of Job Satisfac- tion,” Work and Occupations 30, no. 1 (2003): 97–122. 94 J. J. Caughron, M. D. Mumford, and E. A. Fleishman, “The Fleishman Job Analy- sis Survey: Development, Validation, and Applications,” in M. A. Wilson, W. Bennett Jr., S. G. Gibson, and G. M. Alliger (eds.), The Handbook of Work Analysis: Methods, Sys- tems, Applications and Science of Work Measure- ment in Organizations (New York: Routledge/

Diversity in Organizations CHAPTER 2 71

Taylor & Francis Group, 2012); and P. D. Converse, F. L. Oswald, M. A. Gillespie, K. A. Field, and E. B. Bizot, “Matching Individu- als to Occupations Using Abilities and the O*Net: Issues and an Application in Career Guidance,” Personnel Psychology, Summer 2004, 451–87. 95 S. S. Wang, “Companies Find Autism Can Be a Job Skill,” The Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2014, B1–B2. 96 N. Wingfield, “Microsoft Chief Backped- als on Women’s Pay,” The Wall Street Journal, October 10, 2014, B1, B7. 97 D. R. Avery, “Reactions to Diversity in Recruitment Advertising: Are the Differences Black and White?” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 4 (2003): 672–79; P. F. McKay and D. R. Avery, “What Has Race Got to Do with It? Unraveling the Role of Racioethnicity in Job Seekers’ Reactions to Site Visits,” Personnel Psychology 59, no. 2 (2006): 395–429; and D. R. Avery and P. F. McKay, “Target Practice: An Organizational Impression Management Approach to Attracting Minority and Female Job Applicants,” Personnel Psychology 59, no. 1 (2006): 157–87. 98 A. Overholt, “More Women Coders,” Fortune, February 25, 2013, 14. 99 L. Kwoh, “McKinsey Tries to Recruit Moth- ers Who Left the Fold,” The Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2013, B1, B7. 100 M. R. Buckley, K. A. Jackson, M. C. Bolino, J. G. Veres, and H. S. Field, “The Influence of

Relational Demography on Panel Interview Ratings: A Field Experiment,” Personnel Psychology 60 (2007): 627–46; J. M. Sacco, C. R. Scheu, A. M. Ryan, and N. Schmitt, “An Investigation of Race and Sex Similarity Ef- fects in Interviews: A Multilevel Approach to Relational Demography,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (2003): 852–65; and J. C. Ziegert and P. J. Hanges, “Employment Discrimina- tion: The Role of Implicit Attitudes, Motiva- tion, and a Climate for Racial Bias,” Journal of Applied Psychology 90 (2005): 553–62. 101 K. Bezrukova, K. A. Jehn, and C. S. Spell, “Reviewing Diversity Training: Where We Have Been and Where We Should Go,” Academy of Management Learning & Education 2 (2012): 207–27. 102 S. T. Bell, “Deep-Level Composition Variables as Predictors of Team Performance: A Meta–Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 595–615; S. K. Horwitz and I. B. Horwitz, “The Effects of Team Diversity on Team Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review of Team Demography,” Journal of Management 33, no. 6 (2007): 987–1015; G. L. Stewart, “A Meta-Analytic Review of Relationships between Team Design Features and Team Performance,” Journal of Management 32, no. 1 (2006): 29–54; and A. Joshi and H. Roh, “The Role of Context in Work Team Diversity Research: A Meta-Analytic Review,” Acad- emy of Management Journal 52, no. 3 (2009): 599–627.

103 G. Andrevski, O. C. Richard, J. D. Shaw, and W. J. Ferrier, “Racial Diversity and Firm Performance: The Mediating Role of Com- petitive Intensity,” Journal of Management 40, no. 3 (2014): 820–44. 104 A. C. Homan, J. R. Hollenbeck, S. E. Humphrey, D. Van Knippenberg, D. R. Ilgen, and G. A. Van Kleef, “Facing Differences with an Open Mind: Openness to Experience, Salience of Intragroup Differences, and Performance of Diverse Work Groups,” Acad- emy of Management Journal 51, no. 6 (2008): 1204–22. 105 E. Kearney and D. Gebert, “Managing Diversity and Enhancing Team Outcomes: The Promise of Transformational Leader- ship,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 1 (2009): 77–89. 106 C. L. Holladay and M. A. Quiñones, “The Influence of Training Focus and Trainer Characteristics on Diversity Train- ing Effectiveness,” Academy of Management Learning and Education 7, no. 3 (2008): 343–54; and R. Anand and M. Winters, “A Retrospective View of Corporate Diversity Training from 1964 to the Present,” Academy of Management Learning and Education 7, no. 3 (2008): 356–72. 107 A. Sippola and A. Smale, “The Global Integration of Diversity Management: A Lon- gitudinal Case Study,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 18, no. 11 (2007): 1895–1916.

S ou

rc e:

T im

W ag

ne r/

ZU M

AP R

ES S

/N ew

sc om

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction3

72

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 73

Patching together a career

In today’s temp economy, there are self-employed, part-time, contract, micro-entrepreneur, temporary, and freelance workers. One example is Brad Stone of Bloomberg Businessweek, pictured here, who worked as a

micro- entrepreneur through task-brokerage firms TaskRabbit, Postmates, and Cherry. These may seem like dream jobs–quick paychecks,

work-when-you-want-to hours, and ultra-flexibility. But how satis-

fied with their jobs are people who have these arrangements?

It depends on your expectations, it seems. Recent research

in Canada studied the concept of work congruence, or the

match between the number of hours a person wants to work and the number of hours the person is offered work. The study

found that as work congruence increased, especially when the

number of hours increased for individuals who wanted more

hours, job satisfaction increased.

Finding a job where the hours fit your wishes seems like an

obvious key to a satisfying job, but it’s not the whole story. For

one thing, some contingent workers get enough hours, but in the

form of unpaid overtime—meaning extra time they put into the

job, but for which they receive no pay. Unpaid overtime is common

in many countries. According to a study of 4,530 workers in 735 workplaces

in Britain, part-timers—who were 27 percent of the workforce—worked almost

10 unpaid overtime hours per week, particularly in professional/ managerial

jobs. The study also found that part-timers who worked unpaid overtime were

more likely to lose their job satisfaction, be absent, and quit than full-time

workers who worked extra hours without additional pay.

3-1 Contrast the three components of an attitude.

3-2 Summarize the relationship between attitudes and behavior.

3-3 Compare the major job attitudes.

3-4 Define job satisfaction.

3-5 Summarize the main causes of job satisfaction.

3-6 Identify three outcomes of job satisfaction.

3-7 Identify four employee responses to job dissatisfaction.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

74 PART 2 The Individual

In the United States, where contingent workers make up 20 percent

of the workforce, job satisfaction suffers from a lack of paid hours. Many

contingent workers say they cannot reliably find enough paid hours to

support themselves and they feel insecure as a result. Professor Arne

Kallenberg acknowledged, “Work has become much more insecure, much

more precarious.”

One large study in China found that job insecurity is strongly negatively related to job satisfaction, meaning the more insecure you are about your

work situation, the less satisfied in your job you are likely to be. As a help,

the U.S. Affordable Care Act has provided a measure of security for millions

of people not covered by an employer’s medical insurance plan, and some

workforce brokerage-type firms like TaskRabbit are offering their “micro-en-

trepreneurs” benefits such as a guaranteed hourly wage. “If we want people

to feel comfortable moving from job to job in a very flexible, decentralized

economy, they need to have some basic protections that allow them to do

that,” said Jacob Hacker, a Yale political scientist. While benefits are helpful, some scholars argue that for millions of con-

tingent workers, security, and thus job satisfaction, will come only from work

congruency—the availability of jobs and schedules that provide enough paid

hours to meet workers’ needs. Stone agrees. “My three-day haul won’t feed

my family,” he observed in counting his roughly $67/day earnings as a

micro-entrepreneur. Freelance worker Heather Burdette, who has been piec-

ing together a career since 2008, had to declare bankruptcy in 2005. “I’m actually more secure right now,” she said, “because I understand that the

bottom can fall out at any time.”

Sources: N. Conway and J. Sturges, “Investigating Unpaid Overtime Working among the Part- Time Workforce,” British Journal of Management 25 (2014): 755–71; B. Y. Lee, J. Wang, and J. Weststar, “Work Hour Congruence: The Effect on Job Satisfaction and Absenteeism,” Inter- national Journal of Human Resource Management 26, no. 5 (2015): 657–75; B. Stone, “My Life as a Task Rabbit,” Bloomberg Businessweek (September 13, 2012), www.businessweek .com/articles/2012-09-13/my-life-as-a-taskrabbit#p1; L. Weber, “For Digital Temps, a Safety Net Emerges,” The Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2014, B7; and I. U. Zeytinoglu, M. Denton, S. Davies, A. Baumann, J. Blythe, and L. Boos, “Retaining Nurses in their Employing Hospitals and in the Profession: Effects of Job Preference, Unpaid Overtime, Importance of Earnings and Stress,” Health Policy 79, no. 1 (2006): 57–72.

It’s almost a truism to say that a job that fits you is one that satisfies you. As the vignette shows, however, what makes a satisfying job is a bit more complex. What factors besides work schedule compatibility and job security affect job attitudes?1 Does having a satisfying job really matter? Before we tackle these important questions, it’s important to define what we mean by attitudes gener- ally, and job attitudes in particular.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 75

Attitudes Attitudes are evaluative statements—either favorable or unfavorable—about ob- jects, people, or events. They reflect how we feel about something. When you say “I like my job,” you are expressing your attitude about your work.

Attitudes are complex. If you ask people about their attitude toward religion, Lady Gaga, or an organization, you may get a simple response, but the underly- ing reasons are probably complicated. To fully understand attitudes, we must consider their fundamental properties or components.

Typically, researchers assume attitudes have three components: cognition, affect, and behavior.2 The statement “My pay is low” is a cognitive component of an attitude—a description of or belief in the way things are. It sets the stage for the more critical part of an attitude—its affective component. Affect is the emo- tional or feeling segment of an attitude reflected in the statement, “I am angry over how little I’m paid.” Affect can lead to behavioral outcomes. The behavioral component of an attitude describes an intention to behave a certain way toward someone or something—as in, “I’m going to look for another job that pays better.”

Viewing attitudes as having three components—cognition, affect, and behavior—helps understand their complexity and the potential relationship between attitudes and behavior. For example, imagine you realized that someone treated you unfairly. Aren’t you likely to have feelings about that, occurring virtually instantaneously with the realization? Thus, cognition and affect are intertwined.

Exhibit 3-1 illustrates how the three components of an attitude are related. In this example, an employee didn’t get a promotion he thought he deserved.

3-1 Contrast the three components of an attitude. attitudes Evaluative statements or judg- ments concerning objects, people, or events.

affective component The emotional or feeling segment of an attitude.

Watch It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Gawker Media: Attitudes and Job Satisfaction.

the components of an attitudeExhibit 3-1

Negative attitude toward

supervisor

Cognitive = evaluation My supervisor gave a promotion to a coworker who deserved it less than I did. My supervisor is unfair.

Affective = feeling I dislike my supervisor!

Co g ni

tio n,

a ff

ec t,

a nd

b eh

a vi

or a

re c

lo se

ly r

el a te

d .

Behavioral = action I’m looking for other work; I’ve complained about my supervisor to anyone who would listen.

behavioral component An intention to behave in a certain way toward someone or something.

cognitive component The opinion or belief segment of an attitude.

76 PART 2 The Individual

His  attitude toward his supervisor is illustrated as follows: The employee thought he deserved the promotion (cognition), he strongly dislikes his super- visor (affect), and he has complained and taken action (behavior). Although we often think cognition causes affect, which then causes behavior, in reality these components are difficult to separate.

In organizations, attitudes are important for their behavioral component. If workers believe, for example, that managers, auditors, and engineers are in a conspiracy to make employees work harder for less money, we should try to understand how this attitude formed, how it impacts job behavior, and how it might be changed.

Attitudes and Behavior Early research on attitudes assumed they were causally related to behavior—that is, the attitudes people hold determine what they do. However, one researcher— Leon Festinger—argued that attitudes follow behavior. Other researchers have agreed that attitudes predict future behavior.3

Did you ever notice how people change what they say so it doesn’t contradict what they do? Perhaps a friend of yours consistently argued that her apartment complex was better than yours until another friend in your complex asked her to move in with him; once she moved to your complex, you noticed her attitude toward her former apartment became more critical. Cases of attitude following behavior illustrate the effects of cognitive dissonance,4 contradictions individu- als might perceive between their attitudes and their behavior.

People seek consistency among their attitudes, and between their attitudes and their behavior.5 Any form of inconsistency is uncomfortable, and individu- als will therefore attempt to reduce it. People seek a stable state, which is a minimum of dissonance. When there is a dissonance, people will alter either the attitudes or the behavior, or they will develop a rationalization for the dis- crepancy. Recent research found, for instance, that the attitudes of employees who had emotionally challenging work events improved after they talked about their experiences with coworkers. Social sharing helped these workers adjust their attitudes to behavioral expectations.6

No individual can avoid dissonance. You know texting while walking is unsafe, but you do it anyway and hope nothing bad happens. Or you give someone advice you have trouble following yourself. The desire to reduce dissonance depends on three factors, including the importance of the elements creating dissonance and the degree of influence we believe we have over the elements. The third factor is the rewards of dissonance; high rewards accompanying high dissonance tend to reduce tension inherent in the dissonance (dissonance is less distressing if accom- panied by something good, such as a higher pay raise than expected). Individuals are more motivated to reduce dissonance when the attitudes are important or when they believe the dissonance is due to something they can control.

The most powerful moderators of the attitudes relationship are the impor- tance of the attitude, its correspondence to behavior, its accessibility, the presence of social pressures, and whether a person has direct experience with the attitude.7 Important attitudes reflect our fundamental values, self-interest, or identifica- tion with individuals or groups we value. These attitudes tend to show a strong relationship to our behavior. However, discrepancies between attitudes and behaviors tend to occur when social pressures to behave in certain ways hold exceptional power, as in most organizations. You’re more likely to remember attitudes you frequently express, and attitudes that our memories can easily access are more likely to predict our behavior. The attitude–behavior relation- ship is also likely to be much stronger if an attitude refers to something with which we have direct personal experience.

3-2 Summarize the relationship between attitudes and behavior.

cognitive dissonance Any incompatibil- ity between two or more attitudes or between behavior and attitudes.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 77

Westin Hotels strives for consistency between employee attitudes and behavior through a global wellness program to help employees improve their health. Shown here is Westin’s executive chef, Frank Tujague, whose cooking demonstrations give employees direct experience with healthy ingredients and cooking techniques. Source: Diane Bondareff/AP Images

Y ou are peacefully at work in your cu-bicle when your coworker invades your space, sitting on your desk and nearly overturning your coffee. As she talks about the morning meeting, do you: a) stop what you’re doing and listen; or b) explain that you’re in the middle of a project and ask to talk some other time?

Your answer may reflect your at- titude toward office talk, but it should be guided by whether your participation is ethical. Sometimes, office conversa- tions can help employees to process information and find solutions to prob- lems. Other times, office talk can be damaging to everyone. Consider the scenario from two perspectives: over- sharing and venting.

More than 60 percent of 514 profes- sional employees recently surveyed in- dicated they encounter individuals who frequently share too much about them- selves. Some are self-centered, narcis- sistic, and “think you want to know all the details of their lives,” according to psychologist Alan Hilfer.

Despite the drawbacks, oversharers can be strong contributors. Billy Bauer, director of marketing for manufacturer Royce Leather, is an oversharer who boasts about his latest sales—which may push other employees to work harder. Oversharers can also contribute to teamwork when they share personal stories related to organizational goals, according to a Harvard Business Re- view article.

Now let’s look at this the other way. According to Yale Professor Amy Wrzesniewski, organization-lovers are often “the first people to become of- fended” when they think the organiza- tion is making wrong decisions. They can become emotional, challenging, and outspoken about their views. If they are not heard, they can increase their venting or withdraw.

Yet organization-lovers can be top- performing employees: they are often highly engaged, inspiring, and strong team players who are more likely to work harder than others. Venting their

frustrations helps restore a positive at- titude to keep them high performing. Research indicates that venting to co- workers can also build camaraderie.

Since guidelines for acceptable office conversation are almost non- existent in the contemporary age of openness, personalization, and trans- parency, you must decide what kinds of office talk are ethical and productive. Knowing who is approaching you for conversation, why they are approaching you, what they may talk about, and how you may keep the discussion produc- tive and ethical can help you choose whether to engage or excuse yourself.

Sources: S. Shellenbarger, “Office Over- sharers: Don’t Tell Us about Last Night,” The Wall Street Journal, June 25, 2014, D2; A. S. McCance, C. D. Nye, L. Wang, K. S. Jones, and C. Chiu, “Alleviating the Bur- den of Emotional Labor: The Role of Social Sharing,” Journal of Management (February 2013): 392–415; and S. Shellenbarger, “When It Comes to Work, Can You Care too Much?” The Wall Street Journal, April 30, 2014, D3.

Office Talk an ethical choice

78 PART 2 The Individual

Job Attitudes We have thousands of attitudes, but OB focuses on a very limited number that form positive or negative evaluations employees hold about their work environ- ments. Much of the research has looked at three attitudes: job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment.8 Other important attitudes in- clude perceived organizational support and employee engagement.

job satisfaction and job involvement When people speak of employee attitudes, they usually mean job satisfaction, a positive feeling about a job resulting from an evaluation of its character- istics. A person with high job satisfaction holds positive feelings about the work, while a person with low satisfaction holds negative feelings. Because OB researchers give job satisfaction high importance, we’ll review this attitude in detail later.

Related to job satisfaction is job involvement, the degree to which people identify psychologically with their jobs and consider their perceived perfor- mance levels important to their self-worth.9 Employees with high job involve- ment strongly identify with and really care about the kind of work they do. Another closely related concept is psychological empowerment, or employ- ees’ beliefs in: the degree to which they influence their work environment, their competencies, the meaningfulness of their job, and their perceived autonomy.10

Research suggests that empowerment initiatives need to be tailored to desired behavioral outcomes. Research in Singapore found that good leaders empower their employees by fostering their self-perception of competence— through involving them in decisions, making them feel their work is important, and giving them discretion to “do their own thing.”11

organizational commitment An employee with organizational commitment identifies with a particular orga- nization and its goals and wishes to remain a member. Emotional attachment to an organization and belief in its values is the “gold standard” for employee commitment.12

Employees who are committed will be less likely to engage in work with- drawal even if they are dissatisfied because they have a sense of organizational loyalty or attachment.13 Even if employees are not currently happy with their work, they are willing to make sacrifices for the organization if they are commit- ted enough.

Perceived organizational support Perceived organizational support (POS) is the degree to which employees believe the organization values their contributions and cares about their well- being. An excellent example is R&D engineer John Greene, whose POS is sky- high because when he was diagnosed with leukemia, CEO Marc Benioff and 350 fellow Salesforce.com employees covered all his medical expenses and stayed in touch with him throughout his recovery. No doubt stories like this are part of the reason Salesforce.com was number 8 of Fortune’s 100 Best Companies to Work For in 2015.14

People perceive their organizations as supportive when rewards are deemed fair, when employees have a voice in decisions, and when they see

3-3 Compare the major job attitudes.

job satisfaction A positive feeling about one’s job resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics.

job involvement The degree to which a person identifies with a job, actively participates in it, and considers performance important to self-worth.

psychological empowerment Employees’ belief in the degree to which they affect their work environment, their compe- tence, the meaningfulness of their job, and their perceived autonomy in their work.

organizational commitment The degree to which an employee identifies with a par- ticular organization and its goals and wishes to maintain membership in the organization.

perceived organizational support (POS) The degree to which employees be- lieve an organization values their contribution and cares about their well-being.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 79

their supervisors as supportive.15 POS is a predictor, but there are some cul- tural influences. POS is important in countries where the power distance, the degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally, is lower. In low power-distance coun- tries like the United States, people are more likely to view work as an exchange than as a moral obligation, so employees look for reasons to feel supported by their organizations. In high power-distance countries like China, employee POS perceptions are not as deeply based on demonstrations of fairness, sup- port, and encouragement.

employee engagement Employee engagement is an individual’s involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthusiasm for the work he or she does. To evaluate engagement, we might ask employees whether they have access to resources and opportunities to learn new skills, whether they feel their work is important and meaning- ful, and whether interactions with coworkers and supervisors are rewarding.16 Highly engaged employees have a passion for their work and feel a deep con- nection to their companies; disengaged employees have essentially checked out, putting time but not energy or attention into their work. Engagement becomes a real concern for most organizations because surveys indicate that few employees—between 17 percent and 29 percent—are highly engaged by their work.

Engagement levels determine many measurable outcomes. A study of nearly 8,000 business units in 36 companies found that units whose employees reported high-average levels of engagement achieved higher levels of customer satisfaction, were more productive, brought in higher profits, and experienced lower levels of turnover and accidents than at other business units.17 Molson Coors, for example, found engaged employees were five times less likely to have safety incidents, and when an accident did occur it was much less serious and less costly for the engaged employee than for a disengaged one ($63 per

power distance The degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally.

employee engagement An individual’s involvement with, satisfaction with, and enthu- siasm for the work he or she does.

Employees waving to guests at Hong Kong Disneyland are committed to the company and its goal of giving visitors a magical and memorable experience. Through careful hiring and extensive training, Disney ensures that employees identify with its priority of pleasing customers by serving them as special guests. Source: Matt Stroshane/UPPA/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom

80 PART 2 The Individual

incident versus $392). Caterpillar set out to increase employee engagement and recorded a resulting 80 percent drop in grievances and a 34 percent increase in highly satisfied customers.18

Such promising findings have earned employee engagement a following in many business organizations and management consulting firms. However, the concept generates active debate about its usefulness, partly because of the dif- ficulty of identifying what creates job engagement. The two top reasons for job engagement that participants in one study gave recently were (1) having a good manager they enjoy working for and (2) feeling appreciated by their supervisor. However, most of their other reasons didn’t relate to the job engagement con- struct.19 Another study in Australia found that emotional intelligence is linked to employee engagement.20 Other research suggested that engagement fluctu- ates partially due to daily challenges and demands.21

One review of the job engagement literature concluded, “The meaning of employee engagement is ambiguous among both academic researchers and among practitioners who use it in conversations with clients.” Another reviewer called engagement “an umbrella term for whatever one wants it to be.”22 Research has set out to identify the dimensions of employee engagement, but the debate is far from settled. For now, we can see that job engagement, in its various incarnations, yields important organizational outcomes.

are these job attitudes really all that Distinct? You might wonder whether job attitudes are really distinct. If people feel deeply engaged by their jobs (high job involvement), isn’t it probable they like it, too (high job satisfaction)? Won’t people who think their organization is supportive (high perceived organizational support) also feel committed to it (strong orga- nizational commitment)? Evidence suggests these attitudes are highly related, perhaps to a confusing degree.

There is some distinctiveness among attitudes, but they overlap greatly for various reasons, including the employee’s personality. Generally, if you know someone’s level of job satisfaction, you know most of what you need to know about how that person sees the organization. Next, we will consider the implica- tions of job satisfaction and then job dissatisfaction.

Job Satisfaction We have already discussed job satisfaction briefly. Now let’s dissect the concept more carefully. How do we measure job satisfaction? What causes an employee to have a high level of job satisfaction? How do satisfied employees affect an or- ganization? Before you answer, a look at the list of worst jobs for job satisfaction (Exhibit 3-2) may give you some indications. You may be surprised that they are not all low-paid jobs.

Measuring job satisfaction Our definition of job satisfaction—a positive feeling about a job resulting from an evaluation of its characteristics—is broad. Yet that breadth is appropriate. A job is more than just shuffling papers, writing programming code, waiting on customers, or driving a truck. Jobs require interacting with coworkers and bosses, following organizational rules and policies, determining the power structure, meeting performance standards, living with less-than-ideal working conditions, adapting to new technology, and so forth. An employee’s assessment

3-4 Define job satisfaction.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 81

of satisfaction with the job is thus a complex summation of many discrete ele- ments. How, then, do we measure it?

Two approaches are popular. The single global rating is a response to one question, such as “All things considered, how satisfied are you with your job?” Respondents circle a number between 1 and 5 on a scale from “highly satisfied” to “highly dissatisfied.” The second method, the summation of job facets, is more sophisticated. It identifies key elements in a job such as the type of work, skills needed, supervision, present pay, promotion opportuni- ties, culture, and relationships with coworkers. Respondents rate these on a standardized scale, and researchers add the ratings to create an overall job satisfaction score.

Is one of these approaches superior? Intuitively, summing up responses to a number of job factors seems likely to achieve a more accurate evaluation of job satisfaction. Research, however, doesn’t support the intuition.23 This is one of those rare instances in which simplicity seems to work as well as complexity, making one method essentially as valid as the other. Both methods can be help- ful. The single global rating method isn’t very time consuming, while the sum- mation of job facets helps managers zero in on problems and deal with them faster and more accurately.

how satisfied are People in their jobs? Are most people satisfied with their jobs? You may want to consider the OB Poll before you answer. Job satisfaction levels can remain quite consistent over time. For instance, U.S. average job satisfaction levels were consistently high from 1972 to 2006.24 However, economic conditions tend to influence job satisfac- tion rates. In late 2007, the economic contraction precipitated a drop-off in job satisfaction; the lowest point was in 2010, when 42.6 percent of U.S. workers re- ported satisfaction with their jobs.25 Approximately 47.7 percent of U.S. workers reported satisfaction with their jobs in 2014,26 but the rebound was still far off

Full-year income

$39,000

$45,000

$23,000

$37,000

$42,000

$55,000

$23,000

$29,000

$37,000

$24,300

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000

Corrections officer

Firefighter

Garbage collector

Flight attendant

Head cook

Broadcaster

Taxi driver

Enlisted military

Newspaper reporter

Lumberjack

Worst jobs of 2013 for job satisfaction*Exhibit 3-2

*Based on physical demands, work environment, income, stress, and hiring outlook.

Source: CareerCast.com (2014), http://www.careercast.com/jobs-rated/worst-jobs-2014.

82 PART 2 The Individual

the 1987 level of 61.1 percent.27 Job satisfaction rates tend to vary in different cultures worldwide, and of course there are always competing measurements that offer alternative viewpoints.

The facets of job satisfaction levels can vary widely. As shown in Exhibit 3-3, people have typically been more satisfied with their jobs overall, the work itself, and their supervisors and coworkers than they have been with their pay and promotion opportunities.

average job satisfaction Levels by FacetExhibit 3-3

0

20

10

40

30

60

50

80

70

100

90

Work Itself Pay

Pe rc

en ta

g e

Promotion Supervision Coworkers Overall

OB POll

65%

60%

55%

50%

45%

40%

Worldwide average

Percentage of 168,000 employees who responded YES to “Are you happy in your job?”

Europe, Middle East, and Africa

All Americas

Asia Pacific

62%

53%

49%

54%

Happy Places

Sources: Statista (2013), http://www.statista.com/statistics/224508/employee-job-satisfaction-worldwide/; Kelly Services Group (2012),

http://www.kellyocg.com/uploadedFiles/Content/Knowledge/Kelly_Global_Workforce_Index_Content/Acquisition%20and%20Retention%20

in%20the%20War%20for%20Talent%20Report.pdf.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 83

There are some cultural differences in job satisfaction. Exhibit 3-4 provides the results of a global study of job satisfaction levels of workers in 15 countries, with the highest levels in Mexico and Switzerland. Do employees in these cul- tures have better jobs? Or are they simply more positive (and less self-critical)? Conversely, the lowest score in the study was for South Korea. Autonomy is low in South Korean culture, and businesses tend to be rigidly hierarchical in struc- ture. Does this make for low job satisfaction?28 It is difficult to discern all the factors influencing the scores, but considering how businesses are responding to changes brought on by globalization may give us clues.

What Causes Job Satisfaction? Think about the best job you’ve ever had. What made it great? The reasons can differ greatly. Let’s discuss some characteristics that likely influence job satisfac- tion, starting with job conditions.

job conditions Generally, interesting jobs that provide training, variety, independence, and control satisfy most employees. Interdependence, feedback, social support, and interaction with coworkers outside the workplace are also strongly related to job satisfaction, even after accounting for characteristics of the work itself.29 As you may have guessed, managers also play a big role in employees’ job satisfaction. Employees who feel empowered by their leaders experience higher job satisfac- tion, one study of a large Hong Kong telecommunications corporation found.30 Research in Israel suggested that a manager’s attentiveness, responsiveness, and support increase the employee’s job satisfaction.31

3-5 Summarize the main causes of job satisfaction.

average Levels of employee job satisfaction by countryExhibit 3-4

Source: Based on J. H. Westover, “The Impact of Comparative State-Directed Development on Working Conditions and Employee

Satisfaction,” Journal of Management & Organization (July 2012): 537–54.

5.72 5.63

5.51 5.45 5.44

5.30 5.27 5.24 5.22 5.18

4.89 4.76

4.20

Me xic

o

Sw itz

erl an

d

No rw

ay

De nm

ark

Un ite

d S tat

es Jap

an

Ge rm

an y

Sw ed

en

Gr ea

t B rita

in

Ca na

da Ru

ssi a

Au str

ali a

Cz ec

h R ep

ub lic

Fra nc

e

So uth

Ko rea

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

5.20

5.40

5.60

5.80

6.00 5.88

5.46

5.16

84 PART 2 The Individual

Thus, job conditions—especially the intrinsic nature of the work itself, social interactions, and supervision—are important predictors of job satisfaction. Although each is important, and although their relative value will vary across employees, the intrinsic nature of the work is most important.32

Personality As important as job conditions are to job satisfaction, personality also plays an important role. People who have positive core self-evaluations (CSEs)—who be- lieve in their inner worth and basic competence—are more satisfied with their jobs than people with negative CSEs. Additionally, in the context of career com- mitment, CSE influences job satisfaction as people with high levels of both CSE and career commitment may realize particularly high job satisfaction.33

core self-evaluation (cSE) Believing in one’s inner worth and basic competence.

Employee engagement is high at Baptist Health of South Florida, where employees share a serious commitment to patient care and are passionate about the work they do. Looking at an EKG readout, hospital employees Yaima Millan and Marvin Rosete feel their work is meaningful and can make a difference in patients’ lives. Source: Wilfredo Lee/AP Images

Pay You’ve probably noticed that pay comes up often when people discuss job satisfaction. Pay does correlate with job satisfaction and overall happiness for many people, but the effect can be smaller once an individual reaches a standard level of comfortable living. Take a look at Exhibit 3-5. It shows the relationship between the average pay for a job and the average level of job sat- isfaction. As you can see, there isn’t much of a relationship there. Money does

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

PErSonAl InvEnTory ASSESSmEnTS core Self Evaluation (cSE) Scale In this chapter, you were introduced to the concept of core self-evaluation (CSE). You probably have a general awareness of your CSE, or how you candidly view your capabilities. This PIA can provide you with further insight.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 85

motivate people, as we will discover in Chapter 6. But what motivates us is not necessarily the same as what makes us happy.

corporate social responsibility (csr) Would you be as happy to work for an organization with a stated social wel- fare mission as one without? An organization’s commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR), or its self-regulated actions to benefit society or the en- vironment beyond what is required by law, increasingly affects employee job satisfaction. Organizations practice CSR in a number of ways, including envi- ronmental sustainability initiatives, nonprofit work, and charitable giving.

CSR is good for the planet and good for people. Employees whose personal values fit with the organization’s CSR mission are often more satisfied. In fact, of 59 large and small organizations recently surveyed, 86 percent reported they have happier employees as a result of their CSR programs.34

The relationship between CSR and job satisfaction is particularly strong for Millennials. “The next generation of employees is seeking out employers that are focused on the triple bottom line: people, planet, and revenue,” said Susan Cooney, founder of philanthropy firm Givelocity.35 CSR allows workers to serve a higher purpose or contribute to a mission. According to researcher Amy Wrzesniewski, people who view their work as part of a higher purpose often realize higher job satisfaction.36 However, an organization’s CSR efforts must be well governed and its initiatives must be sustainable for long-term job satisfac- tion benefits.37

Although the link between CSR and job satisfaction is strengthening, not all employees find value in CSR.38 Therefore, organizations need to address a few issues in order to be most effective. First, not all projects are equally mean- ingful for every person’s job satisfaction, yet participation for all employees is

corporate social responsibility (cSR) An organization’s self-regulated actions to benefit society or the environment beyond what is required by law.

relationship between average Pay in job and job satisfaction of employees in that job

Exhibit 3-5

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

$20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $100,000 $140,000$160,000P er

ce n t

o f

Jo b S

a ti sf

a ct

io n S

ca le

M a

x im

u m

Pay in US$—2009

$120,000$80,000

Source: T. A. Judge, R. F. Piccolo, N. P. Podsakoff, J. C. Shaw, and B. L. Rich, “The Relationship between Pay and Job Satisfaction:

A Meta-Analysis of the Literature,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 77, no. 2 (2010): 157–67.

86 PART 2 The Individual

sometimes expected. For instance, Lisa Dewey, a partner at one of the world’s largest law firms, said, “All DLA Piper attorneys and staff are encouraged to par- ticipate in the firm’s pro bono and volunteer projects.”39 Requiring these activi- ties may decrease overall job satisfaction for those who do not wish to volunteer their time but are required to do so.

Second, some organizations require employees to contribute in a prescribed manner. For instance, consulting firm entreQuest’s CEO, Joe Mechlinksi, requires employees to participate in “Give Back Days” by serving in a soup kitchen, building a Habitat for Humanity house, or mentoring children. These choices may not fit every individual’s vision of CSR. Furthermore, pressuring people to go “above and beyond” in ways that are not natural for them can burn them out for future CSR projects40 and lower their job satisfaction, particularly when CSR projects provide direct benefits to the organization (such as positive press coverage).41 People want CSR to be genuine and authentic.

Third, CSR measures can seem disconnected from the employee’s actual work,42 providing no increase to job satisfaction. After watching consulting firm KPMG’s “over the top” video that boasted of involvement in the election of Nelson Mandela and the end of Apartheid, the launch of the first space station by NASA, and the freedom of U.S. hostages in Iran, one anonymous employee questioned his employment. “If I want to really make a change,” he said, “why would I sit here?”43

In sum, CSR is a needed, positive trend of accountability and serving. It can also significantly contribute to increased employee job satisfaction when managed well.

Outcomes of Job Satisfaction Having discussed some of the causes of job satisfaction, we now turn to some specific outcomes.

job Performance As several studies have concluded, happy workers are more likely to be produc- tive workers. Some researchers used to believe the relationship between job sat- isfaction and job performance was a myth, but a review of 300 studies suggested the correlation is quite robust.44 Individuals with higher job satisfaction per- form better, and organizations with more satisfied employees tend to be more effective than those with fewer.

organizational citizenship behavior (ocb) It seems logical that job satisfaction should be a major determinant of an em- ployee’s organizational citizenship behavior (known as OCB or citizenship be- havior, see Chapter 1).45 OCBs include people talking positively about their organizations, helping others, and going beyond the normal expectations of their jobs. Evidence suggests job satisfaction is moderately correlated with OCB; people who are more satisfied with their jobs are more likely to engage in citi- zenship behavior.46

Why does job satisfaction lead to OCB? One reason is trust. Research in 18 countries suggests that managers reciprocate employees’ OCB with trusting behaviors of their own.47 Individuals who feel their coworkers support them are also more likely to engage in helpful behaviors than those who have antagonistic coworker relationships.48 Personality matters, too. Individuals with certain per- sonality traits (agreeableness and conscientiousness, see Chapter 5) are more

3-6 Identify three outcomes of job satisfaction.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 87

satisfied with their work, which in turn leads them to engage in more OCB.49 Finally, individuals who receive positive feedback on their OCB from their peers are more likely to continue their citizenship activities.50

customer satisfaction Because service organization managers should be concerned with pleasing cus- tomers, it’s reasonable to ask whether employee satisfaction is related to posi- tive customer outcomes. For frontline employees who have regular customer contact, the answer is “yes.” Satisfied employees appear to increase customer satisfaction and loyalty.51

A number of companies are acting on this evidence. Online shoe retailer Zappos is so committed to finding customer service employees who are satisfied with the job that it offers a $2,000 bribe to quit the company after training, figur- ing the least satisfied will take the cash and go.52 Zappos employees are empow- ered to “create fun and a little weirdness” to ensure that customers are satisfied, and it works: of the company’s more than 24 million customers, 75 percent are repeat buyers. Therefore, for Zappos, employee satisfaction has a direct effect on customer satisfaction.

Life satisfaction Until now, we’ve treated job satisfaction as if it were separate from life satisfac- tion, but they may be more related than you think.53 Research in Europe indi- cated that job satisfaction is positively correlated with life satisfaction, and your attitudes and experiences in life spill over into your job approaches and experi- ences.54 Furthermore, life satisfaction decreases when people become unem- ployed, according to research in Germany, and not just because of the loss of income.55 For most individuals, work is an important part of life, and therefore it makes sense that our overall happiness depends in no small part on our hap- piness in our work (our job satisfaction).

Service firms like Air Canada understand that satisfied employees increase customer satisfaction and loyalty. As frontline employees who have regular customer contact, the airline’s ticket agents are friendly, upbeat, and responsive while greeting passengers and helping them with luggage check-in and seat assignments. Source: Aaron Harris/Bloomberg/Getty Images

88 PART 2 The Individual

Honestly, I hate my job. But there are reasons I should stay: this is my first job out of college, it pays pretty well, and it will establish my career. Is there any hope, or am I doomed until I quit?

— Taylor

Dear Taylor: You’re not doomed! You can work on your attitude to either improve your ex- perience or find a positive perspective. In other words, if you can turn “I hate my job” into “this is what I’m doing to make my situation better,” your job sat- isfaction is likely to improve. Try this:

• Write down everything you hate about your job, but wait until you have a few days off so you can get a more objective viewpoint. Be specif- ic. Keep asking yourself why, as in, “Why do I dislike my office mate?” Also, consider your history: was the job always a problem, or perhaps cir- cumstances have changed?

• Now write down everything you like about the job. Again, be specific. Think about the environment, the people, and the work separately. Find something positive, even if it’s just the coffee in the break room.

• Compare your lists for clues about your attitude and job satisfaction. Look for mentions of the work or the people. Job satisfaction is generally more strongly related to how inter- esting your work is than it is to other factors. People, especially your su- pervisor, are important to your atti- tude toward work as well.

• Read your lists aloud to a few trusted friends (you don’t want to rant about your boss with your coworker). Ask them to help process your griev- ances. Are there deal-breakers like harassment?

• Decide whether you can talk with your manager about this. According to Roy L. Cohen, author of The Wall Street Professional’s Survival Guide, “consider whether how you’re being treated is unique to you or shared by your colleagues.” If everyone has the same problem, especially if the problem is the boss, you probably shouldn’t approach your manager. But changes can be made in most situations.

Based on the sources of your griev- ances and your ability to make changes

in the workplace, you may choose to ad- dress the issues, or develop skills for your next job. Meanwhile, don’t sabo- tage yourself with sloppy performance and complaints. Instead, look for posi- tive reinforcement, join a professional organization, or volunteer. Happy em- ployees are healthier. You deserve to be one of them.

Sources: “Employee Engagement,” Work- force Management (February 2013): 19; A. Hurst, “Being ‘Good’ Isn’t the Only Way to Go,” The New York Times, April 20, 2014, 4; R. E. Silverman, “Work as Labor or Love?” The Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2012, D3; H. J. Smith, T. F. Pettigrew, G. M. Pippin, and S. Bialosiewicz, “Relative Deprivation: A Theoretical and Meta-Analytic Review,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 16 (2012): 203–32; and A. Tugend, “Survival Skills for a Job You Detest,” The Wall Street Journal, April 7, 2012, B5.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

How can I make my job better? career objectives

The Impact of Job Dissatisfaction What happens when employees dislike their jobs? One theoretical model—the exit–voice–loyalty–neglect framework—is helpful for understanding the conse- quences of dissatisfaction. Exhibit 3-6 illustrates employees’ four responses to job dissatisfaction, which differ along two dimensions: constructive/destructive and active/passive. The responses are as follows:56

• Exit. The exit response directs behavior toward leaving the organization, including looking for a new position or resigning. To measure the effects of this response to dissatisfaction, researchers study individual termina- tions and collective turnover, the total loss to the organization of employee knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics.57

• Voice. The voice response includes actively and constructively attempting to improve conditions, including suggesting improvements, discussing problems with superiors, and undertaking union activity.

3-7 Identify four employee responses to job dissatisfaction.

exit Dissatisfaction expressed through behavior directed toward leaving the organization.

voice Dissatisfaction expressed through active and constructive attempts to improve conditions.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 89

• Loyalty. The loyalty response means passively but optimistically waiting for conditions to improve, including speaking up for the organization in the face of external criticism and trusting the organization and its manage- ment to “do the right thing.”

• Neglect. The neglect response passively allows conditions to worsen and includes chronic absenteeism or lateness, reduced effort, and an increased error rate.

Exit and neglect behaviors are linked to performance variables such as productivity, absenteeism, and turnover. But this model expands employee responses to include voice and loyalty—constructive behaviors that allow indi- viduals to tolerate unpleasant situations or improve working conditions.

The model helps us understand various situations. For instance, union mem- bers often express dissatisfaction through the grievance procedure or formal contract negotiations. These voice mechanisms allow them to continue in their jobs while acting to improve the situation.

As helpful as this framework is, it’s quite general. We will next address coun- terproductive work behavior, a behavioral response to job dissatisfaction.

counterproductive Work behavior (cWb) Substance abuse, stealing at work, undue socializing, gossiping, absenteeism, and tardiness are examples of behaviors that are destructive to organizations. They are indicators of a broader syndrome called counterproductive work behavior (CWB), also termed deviant behavior in the workplace, or simply em- ployee withdrawal (see Chapter 1).58 Like other behaviors we have discussed, CWB doesn’t just happen—the behaviors often follow negative and sometimes longstanding attitudes. Therefore, if we can identify the predictors of CWB, we may lessen the probability of its effects.

Generally, job dissatisfaction predicts CWB. People who are not satisfied with their work become frustrated, which lowers their performance59 and makes them more likely to commit CWB.60 Other research suggests that, in addition to vocational misfit (being in the wrong line of work), lack of fit with

loyalty Dissatisfaction expressed by passively waiting for conditions to improve.

neglect Dissatisfaction expressed through allowing conditions to worsen.

counterproductive work behavior (cWB) Actions that actively damage the organization, including stealing, behaving aggressively toward coworkers, or being late or absent.

responses to Dissatisfaction

Active

Constructive Destructive

Passive

VOICE EXIT

LOYALTY NEGLECT

Exhibit 3-6

90 PART 2 The Individual

the organization (working in the wrong kind of organizational culture) also predicts CWBs.61 Our immediate social environment also matters. One German study suggests that we are influenced toward CWB by the norms of our immedi- ate work environment, such that individuals in teams with high absenteeism are more likely to be absent themselves.62 CWB can, furthermore, be a response to abusive supervision from managers, which then increases the abuse, starting a vicious cycle.63

One important point about CWB is that dissatisfied employees often choose one or more of these specific behaviors due to idiosyncratic factors. One worker might quit. Another might use work time to surf the Internet or take work supplies home for personal use. In short, workers who don’t like their jobs “get even” in various ways. Because those ways can be quite creative, con- trolling only one behavior with policies and punishments leaves the root cause untouched. Employers should seek to correct the source of the problem—the dissatisfaction—rather than try to control the different responses.

According to U.K. research, sometimes CWB is an emotional reaction to perceived unfairness, a way to try to restore an employee’s sense of equity exchange.64 It therefore has complex ethical implications. For example, is someone who takes a box of markers home from the office for his children acting ethically? Some people consider this stealing. Others may want to look at moderating factors such as the employee’s contribution to the organization before they decide. Does the person generously give extra time and effort to the organization, with little thanks or compensation? If so, they might see CWB behavior as part of an attempt to “even the score.”

As a manager, you can take steps to mitigate CWB. You can poll employee attitudes, for instance, and identify areas for workplace improvement. If there is no vocational fit, the employee will not be fulfilled,65 so you can screen for that. Tailoring tasks so a person’s abilities and values can be exercised should increase job satisfaction and reduce CWB.66 Furthermore, creating strong teams, integrating supervisors with them, providing formalized team policies, and introducing team-based incentives may help lower the CWB “contagion” that lowers the standards of the group.67

absenteeism We find a consistent negative relationship between satisfac- tion and absenteeism, but the relationship is moderate to weak.68 Generally, when numerous alternative jobs are available, dissatisfied employees have high absence rates, but when there are few alternatives, dissatisfied employees have the same (low) rate of absence as satisfied employees.69 Organizations that provide liberal sick leave benefits are encouraging all their employees— including those who are highly satisfied—to take days off. You can find work satisfying yet still want to enjoy a 3-day weekend if those days come free with no penalties.

turnover The relationship between job satisfaction and turnover is stronger than between satisfaction and absenteeism.70 Overall, a pattern of lowered job satisfaction is the best predictor of intent to leave. Turnover has a workplace en- vironment connection too. If the climate within an employee’s immediate work- place is one of low job satisfaction leading to turnover, there will be a contagion effect. This suggests managers consider the job satisfaction (and turnover) pat- terns of coworkers when assigning workers to a new area.71

The satisfaction–turnover relationship is affected by alternative job pros- pects. If an employee accepts an unsolicited job offer, job dissatisfaction was less predictive of turnover because the employee more likely left in response to “pull” (the lure of the other job) than “push” (the unattractiveness of the

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 91

current job). Similarly, job dissatisfaction is more likely to translate into turn- over when other employment opportunities are plentiful. Furthermore, when employees have high “human capital” (high education, high ability), job dissat- isfaction is more likely to translate into turnover because they have, or perceive, many available alternatives.72

There are some factors that help break the dissatisfaction–turnover relation- ship. Employees’ embeddedness—connections to the job and community— can help lower the probability of turnover, particularly in collectivist (group- oriented) cultures.73 Embedded employees seem less likely to want to consider alternative job prospects.

Managers often “Don’t get it” Given the evidence we’ve just reviewed, it should come as no surprise that job satisfaction can affect the bottom line. One study by a management consulting firm separated large organizations into those with high morale (more than 70 percent of employees expressed overall job satisfaction) and medium or low morale (fewer than 70 percent). The stock prices of companies in the high- morale group grew 19.4 percent, compared with 10 percent for the medium- or low-morale group. Despite these results, many managers are unconcerned about employee job satisfaction. Others overestimate how satisfied employees are, so they don’t think there’s a problem when there is. In one study of 262 large employers, 86 percent of senior managers believed their organizations

There are exceptions, of course, but this statement is basically true. A glance at Fortune’s Best Compa- nies to Work For list, where companies are chosen by the happiness induce- ments they provide, reveals recogniz- able profit leaders: Google, SAS, Edward Jones, and REI, to name a few. However, all happiness is not created equal.

An employee who is happy because her coworker did most of the work on her team’s project isn’t necessarily go- ing to work harder, for instance. Some happiness-inducers also seem unrelat- ed to profit increases, such as Google’s bowling alley and Irish pub, Facebook’s free chocolate lunches, and Salesforce. com’s off-the-charts parties. Traditional benefits programs also don’t necessar- ily yield higher job satisfaction, produc- tivity, and profits. Research indicates employees highly value paid time off, a retirement plan such as a 401(k),

and lower health premiums. But many companies offer these benefits and are nowhere near the Fortune 500 organi- zations in profits.

It turns out that the value of keep- ing happiness in the profit equation may be felt in the level of employee en- gagement. As Julie Gebauer, a manag- ing director for consulting firm Towers Watson, said, “It’s not just about mak- ing them happy—that’s not a business issue. Engagement is.” Job engage- ment “represents employees’ commit- ment . . . and the level of discretionary effort  they are willing to put forth at work,” wrote Jack in the Box’s Execu- tive VP Mark Blankenship. Happy em- ployees with higher job engagement are willing to work hard, make customers happy, and stay with the company— three factors that affect the bottom line in a big way. Conversely, a review of 300 studies revealed that turnover rates re-

sulting from poor attitudes or low en- gagement led to poorer organizational performance.

So the moral of the story seems to be this: treat others as we want to be treated in the workplace. It’s just good business.

Sources: M. H. Blankenship, “Happier Employees + Happier Customers = More Profit,” HR Magazine, July 2012, 36–38; A. Edmans, “The Link between Job Satisfac- tion and Firm Value, with Implications for Corporate Social Responsibility,” Academy of Management Perspectives (November 2012): 1–19; “Getting Them to Stay,” Work- force Management (February 2013): 19; J. K. Harter et al., “Causal Impact of Employee Work Perceptions on the Bottom Line of Or- ganizations,” Perspectives on Psychological Science (July 2010): 378–89; T.-Y. Park and J. D. Shaw, “Turnover Rates and Organiza- tional Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Jour- nal of Applied Psychology (March 2013): 268–309; and J. Waggoner, “Do Happy Workers Mean Higher Profit?” USA Today, February 20, 2013, B1–B2.

Happy Workers Means Happy Profits Myth or science?

92 PART 2 The Individual

treated employees well, but only 55 percent of employees agreed. Another study found 55 percent of managers thought morale was good in their organization, compared to only 38 percent of employees.74

Regular surveys can reduce gaps between what managers think employees feel and what they really feel. A gap in understanding can affect the bottom line in small franchise sites as well as in large companies. As manager of a KFC res- taurant in Houston, Jonathan McDaniel surveyed his employees every 3 months. Some results led him to make changes, such as giving employees greater say about which workdays they had off. However, McDaniel believed the process itself was valuable. “They really love giving their opinions,” he said. “That’s the most important part of it—that they have a voice and that they’re heard.” Surveys are no panacea, but if job attitudes are as important as we believe, organizations need to use every reasonable method find out how they can be improved.75

Summary Managers should be interested in their employees’ attitudes because attitudes influence behavior and indicate potential problems. Creating a satisfied work- force is hardly a guarantee of successful organizational performance, but evi- dence strongly suggests managers’ efforts to improve employee attitudes will likely result in positive outcomes, including greater organizational effectiveness, higher customer satisfaction, and increased profits.

Implications for Managers ●● Of the major job attitudes—job satisfaction, job involvement, organiza-

tional commitment, perceived organizational support (POS), and em- ployee engagement—remember that an employee’s job satisfaction level is the best single predictor of behavior.

●● Pay attention to your employees’ job satisfaction levels as determinants of their performance, turnover, absenteeism, and withdrawal behaviors.

●● Measure employee job attitudes objectively and at regular intervals in or- der to determine how employees are reacting to their work.

●● To raise employee satisfaction, evaluate the fit between the employee’s work interests and the intrinsic parts of the job; then create work that is challenging and interesting to the individual.

●● Consider the fact that high pay alone is unlikely to create a satisfying work environment.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 93

Employer–Employee loyalty Is an Outdated Concept

The word loyalty is horribly outdated. long gone are the days when an employer would keep an employee for life, as are the days when an employee would want to work for a single com- pany for an entire career.

Professor linda Gratton says, “loyalty is dead—killed off through shortening contracts, outsourcing, automation, and multiple careers. Faced with what could be 50 years of work, who honestly wants to spend that much time with one company? Serial monogamy is the order of the day.” many employers agree; only 59 percent of employers report feeling loyal to their employees, while a mere 32 percent believe their employees are loyal to them.

The loyalty on each side of the equation is weak. For the most part, this is warranted—why retain employees who are subpar performers? It’s only a matter of the employer handling the loyalty of employees with respect. Admittedly, some breaches happen. For example, re- nault ended the 31-year career of employee michel Balthazard (and two others) on false charges of espionage. When the wrongness of the charges became public, renault halfheartedly offered the employees their jobs back and a lame apology: “renault thanks them for the quality of their work at the group and wishes them every success in the future.”

As for employees’ loyalty to their employers, that is worth little nowadays. one manager with Deloitte says the current employee at- titude is, “I’m leaving, I had a great experience, and I’m taking that with me.” There just isn’t an expectation of loyalty. In fact, only 9 percent of recent college graduates would stay with an employer for more than a year if they didn’t like the job, research indicated. But there is nothing wrong with this. A “loyal” employee who stays with the organization but isn’t satisfied with the job can do a lot of damage. At best, this person will be less productive. At worst, he or she can engage in years’ worth of damaging CWB. For the worker, staying with an organization forever—no matter what—can limit career and income prospects.

The sooner we see the employment experience for what it is (most- ly transactional, mostly short- to medium-term), the better off we’ll be. The workplace is no place for fantasies of loyalty.

PoInt

A greed: the word loyalty is outdated when it refers to employers and employees. But the basic concept is valid in the work-place. We now just measure loyalty with finer measurements such as organizational trust and organizational commitment. There certainly are employers and employees who show little loyalty to each other, but that isn’t the norm.

Says management guru Tom Peters, “Bottom line: loyalty matters. A lot. yesterday. Today. Tomorrow.” University of michigan’s Dave Ulrich says, “leaders who encourage loyalty want employees who are not only committed to and engaged in their work but who also find meaning from it.” Commitment. Engagement. Trust. These are some of the build- ing blocks of loyalty.

It is true that the employer–employee relationship has changed. For example, (largely) gone are the days when employers provided guaranteed payout pensions to which employees contribute nothing. But is that such a bad thing? many employers have helped employees take charge of their own retirement plans.

moreover, it’s not that loyalty is dead, but rather that employers are loyal to a different kind of employee. True, employers no longer re- fuse to fire a long-tenured but incompetent employee, which is a good thing. These employees can bring down everyone’s productivity and morale. Furthermore, in a globalized world where customer options are plentiful, organizations with “deadwood”—people who don’t contrib- ute—will not be competitive enough to survive. Companies are instead loyal to employees who do their jobs well, and that is as it should be.

In short, employees become loyal—trusting, engaged, and committed—when organizations and their people act decently. Employ- ers with superior managers who empower their employees obtain high levels of this kind of loyalty. A true reciprocal relationship is a stronger business model than employees staying with an organization for years in exchange for an organization’s caretaking. Bonds of trust and loyalty rest on the relationships of individuals. Workplace psychologist Binna Kandola observes, “Workplaces may have changed but loyalty is not dead—the bonds between people are too strong.”

CounterPoInt

Sources: “If you Started a Job and you Didn’t like It, How long Would you Stay?” USA Today, June 11, 2012, 1B; o. Gough and S. Arkani, “The Impact of the Shifting Pensions landscape on the Psychological Contract,” Personnel Review 40, no. 2 (2011): 173–84; “loyalty Gap Widens,” USA Today, may 16, 2012, 1B; P. Korkki, “The Shifting Definition of Worker loyalty,” The New York Times, April 24, 2011, BU8; I. macsinga, C. Sulea, P. Sarbescu, and C. Dumitru, “Engaged, Committed and Helpful Employees: The role of Psychological Empowerment,” Journal of Psychology 19, no. 3, 263–76; m. Top, m. Akdere, and m. Tarcan, “Examining Transformational leadership, Job Satisfaction, organizational Commitment and organizational Trust in Turkish Hospitals: Public Servants versus Private Sector Employees,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 26, no. 9 (2015): 1259–82; and “Is Workplace loyalty an outmoded Concept?” Financial Times, march 8, 2011, www .ft.com/, accessed July 29, 2015.

94 PART 2 The Individual

CHaPTEr rEvIEW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QuEsTIOns fOr rEvIEW 3-1 What are the three components of attitudes? 3-2 Does behavior always follow from attitudes? 3-3 What are the major job attitudes? 3-4 How do we measure job satisfaction?

3-5 What causes job satisfaction? 3-6 What are the three outcomes of job satisfaction? 3-7 How do employees respond to job satisfaction?

ExPErIEnTIal ExErCIsE What Satisfies You about Your Dream Job? Each class member is to write the job title of his or her ideal first job out of college on a small piece of paper. The class then breaks into random teams of five to six people each and completes the following steps:

1. List the top three characteristics each of the members wants from their first job out of college (the aspects that would make them satisfied in the job). Everyone should contribute, and identical ideas should be recorded as often as they occur.

2. Each team should identify whether each job character- istic is an intrinsic satisfier (like working with others, or the job itself) or an extrinsic one (like pay or benefits) by marking an “I” or “E” next to it.

3. Tally the I’s and E’s and write them in descending order. For instance, if pay was mentioned by all the team mem- bers, it goes at the top of the list under “E.”

The class can then reassemble to share their find- ings and discuss the following questions.

Questions 3-8. Is there a consensus in the class about which list

is longer (intrinsic or extrinsic)? If so, why do you think one list is longer than the other?

3-9. Is there a consensus about the top three intrinsic or extrinsic characteristics? What do you think explains whether there is or not?

3-10. Looking at your individual dream job title, how likely do you think your job is to match the characteristics generated by the class? How likely do you think your job is to match your top three characteristics?

“Arrogant, condescending, mean-spirited, hateful … and those traits describe the nicest people at Netflix,” writes one anonymous employee. “Management is awful … good old boys club,” writes a Coca-Cola market development manager. And the reviews keep rolling in; Coca-Cola has 1,600 employee reviews and some companies, like Google, have double that number on Glassdoor, one of the Inter- net sites that allows anyone to rate their employers.

Websites like Glassdoor are thriving; employees increas- ingly join the forums and seem to relish the chance to speak freely. The app Memo, which claimed 10,000 new members in about 3 months, allows users to post, com- ment, and share links. They will soon be able to upload

ETHICal DIlEMMa Tell-All Websites photographs and documents, which will raise new security concerns for organizations.

Ryan Janssen, CEO of Memo’s parent company, Col- lectively, says apps like Memo, Yik Yak, and Whisper allow bosses access to candid feedback they cannot otherwise get. Janssen said, “The employee’s natural reaction [when managers ask for feedback directly] is to tell you what you want to hear.” There is certainly truth to this—studies indi- cate that employees “put on a happy face” for their bosses. When people know their posts aren’t anonymous, “People put on this weird, fake professional face,” he said.

Organizations are aware that people watch what they say when they can be identified, and many have used

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 95

anonymous job attitude surveys for this reason. Still, evalu- ations from these surveys are often more glowing, and less detailed, than anonymous website feedback. Some orga- nizations have therefore altered the frequency and scope of surveys to obtain more depth. Others have their own intranet platforms to solicit concerns and complaints.

Beyond the personally unethical aspect of posting scathing denouncements about people or organiza- tions online—sharing details with the world that you would not share in person—issues of organizational eth- ics come into play. While companies like Visa, Boeing, and Hewlett-Packard have tried to discourage employ- ees from anonymously venting on websites and apps, such mandates may violate the employees’ right of free speech. And how anonymous are anonymous posts? Posts on Glassdoor and other forums eliminate a per- son’s name, but can’t bosses sometimes determine which subordinate posted the comments? Managers every- where need to decide how much management sleuthing

is ethical, and what consequences, if any, can be forced on subordinates for anonymous posts.

Grant Vodori, co-founder of a digital marketing agency in Chicago, has been successful in obtaining candid an- swers from his employees through polls taken several times each week. “It’s sometimes a little bit scary,” he said, asking himself, “Do I really want to know the answer to this?”

Questions 3-11. Do you think employees have a right to say what

they want to about their organizations online, as opposed to in private?

3-12. How would you react if you learned one of your employees posted unflattering comments about you as a manager? Would your reaction be any different if the employee posted unflattering comments about you as a person?

3-13. Do you feel it is acceptable to post comments anonymously, or do you think people should include their names? Why or why not?

The management team at Learner’s Edge, an online con- tinuing education company, decided to adopt a ROWE (results-only work environment) policy, developed by Best Buy employees and summarized in its slogan, “Work whenever you want, wherever you want, as long as the work gets done.” Kyle Pederson was one of only three Learner’s Edge employees who showed up the first day of the ROWE experiment. And the second day, and the third.

“For almost a month, everyone cleared out,” Pederson said. “It was just me, my co-founder and our executive di- rector all wondering, ‘What on earth have we done?’ ”

Clearly, employees were testing the outer limits of work- place flexibility. Thankfully, it paid off. Learner’s Edge re- ported “better work, higher productivity” after the initial phase of the program. It seems employees knew the ways they work best. In fact, some of Pederson’s employees have returned to the office, while others gather at Starbucks or over dinner . . . whatever gets the work done.

Suntell president and COO, Veronica Wooten, whose risk-management software firm adopted the ROWE pro- gram a few years ago, is also a fan of the flexible workplace. “We made the transition, and started letting go and let- ting people make their own decisions,” Wooten said. As a result of workplace flexibility, the company’s customer

CasE InCIDEnT 1 The Pursuit of Happiness: Flexibility base increased 20 percent, meetings were reduced by 50  percent, and expenses decreased 12 percent (Wooten used the savings to give everyone a raise).

It seems that everyone should be happy with this ulti- mate degree of job flexibility. Employees worldwide do seem to increasingly value flexible work environments, with roughly two of three workers of all ages wanting to work from home, at least occasionally. However, the ben- efit may not be as great for some people. In a recent study, 62 percent of respondents believed that Gen X individuals benefit most from flexibility arrangements, 35 percent be- lieved Gen Y individuals benefit most, and only 3 percent believed baby boomers benefit most.

Research correlates job satisfaction most strongly with the nature of the work itself, not the location where it is performed. Thus, while as employees we say we want flex- ibility, what actually makes us satisfied is often something else. Then there are the costs of such work arrangements. Employers such as Yahoo!’s Marissa Mayer have thought that flexible workers become detached from the organi- zation, communicate less, are less available, and lose the benefits of teamwork. Employees have concerns about long periods of working away from the office: Will out of sight mean out of mind to their employers?

Sources: L. Gilman, “Memo App Lets Workers Vent Anonymously about the Boss,” The Wall Street Jour- nal, January 21, 2015, B7; Glassdoor.com; A. S. McCance, C. D. Nye, L. Wang, K. S. Jones, and C. Chiu, “Alleviating the Burden of Emotional Labor: The Role of Social Sharing,” Journal of Management (Feb- ruary 2013): 392–415; R. E. Silverman, “Are You Happy in Your Job? Bosses Push Weekly Surveys,” The Wall Street Journal, December 3, 2014, B1, B4; and R. E. Silverman, “Workers Really Do Put on a Happy Face for the Boss,” The Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2015, D4.

96 PART 2 The Individual

For ROWE or any flexible arrangement to work, organi- zations need to create clear job descriptions, set attainable goals, and rely on strong metrics to indicate productivity. Managers need to foster close connections and communi- cate meaningfully to keep flexible workers engaged in the company, its culture, and its processes. Most importantly, employees need to get the work done, no matter where and when they do it.

Questions 3-14. Do you think only certain individuals are attracted

to flexible work arrangements? Why or why not? 3-15. What characteristics of flexible work arrange-

ments might contribute to increased levels of job satisfaction?

3-16. How might flexible work affect a company’s bottom line?

Sources: “The 2015 Workplace Flexibility Study,” WorkplaceTrends (February 3, 2015), https:// workplacetrends.com/the-2015-workplace-flexibility-study/; L. Belkin, “Is ROWE the Future of Work? Or an Unworkable Fantasy?” The Huffington Post Business (April 17, 2013), www.huffingtonpost .com/2013/04/15/rowe-future-work_n_3084426.html; R. R. Hastings, “Full Engagement Lack- ing Around World,” Society for Human Resources Management ( January 3, 2011), www.shrm.org/ hrdisciplines/employeerelations/articles/Pages/FullEngagementLacking.aspx; A. McGrory- Dixon, “Workplace Flexibility, Equity Important for Millennials,” Benefits Pro (April 19, 2013), www .benefitspro.com/2013/04/19/workplace-flexibility-equity-important-for-millenn; and F. Origo and L. Pagani, “Workplace Flexibility and Job Satisfaction: Some Evidence from Europe,” Interna- tional Journal of Manpower 29 (2008): 539–66.

Consider for a moment a midlevel manager, Fatima, who seems to be doing well. She’s consistently making her re- quired benchmarks and goals, she has built successful re- lationships with colleagues, and senior management has identified her as having “high potential.” But she isn’t satisfied in her job. She’d be interested in understanding how her organization can use social media in marketing ef- forts at all levels of the organization, for example, but her job doesn’t allow her to work on this. She wants to quit and find something that better suits her passions, but in her economic situation this may not be an option. So she has decided to proactively reconfigure her current job.

Fatima is part of a movement toward job “crafting,” which is the process of deliberately reorganizing your job so that it better fits your motives, strengths, and pas- sions. So how did Fatima craft her job? She first noticed that she was spending too much of her time monitoring her team’s performance and answering questions, and not enough time working on the creative projects that inspire her. She then considered how to modify her relationship with the team so that her activities incorporated her pas- sion for social media strategies, with the team’s activities more centered on developing new marketing. She also identified members of her team who might be able to help

CasE InCIDEnT 2 Job Crafting her implement her new strategies and directed her inter- actions with these individuals toward her new goals. As a result, not only did her engagement in her work increase, but she also developed new ideas that were recognized and advanced within the organization. In sum, she found that by actively and creatively examining her work, she was able to shape her job into one that is truly satisfying.

As you may have noted, Fatima exhibited a proactive personality—she was eager to develop her own options and find her own resources. Proactive individuals are often self- empowered and are, therefore, more likely to seek work- able solutions when they are not satisfied. Research leads us to believe Fatima will be successful in her customized job and that she will experience increased well-being. To the extent possible, then, all employees should feel encour- aged to be proactive in creating their best work situations.

Questions 3-17. Should organizations work to create jobs that are

satisfying to individual employees? 3-18. Are the principles of job crafting described here

relevant to your job or studies? Why or why not? 3-19. Are there any potential drawbacks to the job craft-

ing approach? If so, how can they be minimized?

Sources: A. B. Bakker, M. Tims, and D. Derks, “Proactive Personality and Job Performance: The Role of Job Crafting and Work Engagement,” Human Relations (October 2012): 1359–78; A. Wrzesniewski, J. M. Berg, and J. E. Dutton, “Turn the Job You Have into the Job You Want,” Harvard Business Review ( June 2010): 114–17; A. Wrzesniewski and J. E. Dutton, “Crafting a Job: Revisioning Employees as Active Crafters of Their Work,” Academy of Management Review 26 (2010): 179–201; and G. R. Slemp and D. A. Vella-Brodrick, “Optimising Employee Mental Health: The Relationship between Intrinsic Need Satisfaction, Job Crafting, and Employee Well-Being,” Journal of Happiness Studies 15, no. 4 (2014): 957–77.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 97

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

3-20. Based on your reading from this chapter and the Ethical Dilemma, do you feel differently about posting anonymous comments online than you did before? Why or why not?

3-21. In consideration of Case Incident 2, some contend that job crafting sounds good in principle but is not nec- essarily practical for every job. What types of jobs are probably not good candidates for job crafting activities?

3-22. MyManagementLab Only—comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

EnDnOTEs 1A. Gengler, “Chained to Your Desk No More,” CNNMoney, April 2014, 53. 2A. Barsky, S. A. Kaplan, and D. J. Beal, “Just Feelings? The Role of Affect in the Formation of Organizational Fairness Judgments,” Journal of Management, January 2011, 248–79; J. A. Mikels, S. J. Maglio, A. E. Reed, and L. J. Kaplowitz, “Should I Go with My Gut? Investigating the Benefits of Emotion- Focused Decision Making,” Emotion, August 2011, 743–53; and A. J. Rojas Tejada, O. M. Lozano Rojas, M. Navas Luque, and P. J. Pérez Moreno, “Prejudiced Attitude Measurement Using the Rasch Scale Model,” Psychological Reports, October 2011, 553–72. 3See L. S. Glasman and D. Ablarracín, “Forming Attitudes That Predict Future Behavior: A Meta-Analysis of the Attitude- Behavior Relation,” Psychological Bulletin, September 2006, 778–822. 4Y. L. Liu and C.-J. Keng, “Cognitive Dissonance, Social Comparison, and Disseminating Untruthful or Negative Truthful EWOM Messages,” Social Behavior and Personality 24, no. 6 (2014): 979–94. 5See, for instance, L. R. Fabrigar, R. E. Petty, S. M. Smith, and S. L. Crites, “Understanding Knowledge Effects on Attitude-Behavior Consistency: The Role of Relevance, Complexity, and Amount of Knowledge,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90, no. 4 (2006): 556–77; and D. J. Schleicher, J. D. Watt, and G. J. Greguras, “Reexamining the Job Satisfaction-Performance Relationship: The Complexity of Attitudes,” Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 1 (2004): 165–77. 6A. S. McCance, C. D. Nye, L. Wang, K. S. Jones, and C. Chiu, “Alleviating the Burden of Emotional Labor: The Role of Social Sharing,” Journal of Management, February 2013, 392–415. 7Ibid. 8D. P. Moynihan and S. K. Pandey, “Finding Workable Levers over Work Motivation: Comparing Job Satisfaction, Job Involvement, and Organizational Commitment,” Administration & Society 39, no. 7 (2007): 803–32.

9S. Zhang, “Impact of Job Involvement on Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in China,” Journal of Business Ethics 120 (2014): 165–74. 10G. Chen and R. J. Klimoski, “The Impact of Expectations on Newcomer Performance in Teams as Mediated by Work Characteristics, Social Exchanges, and Empowerment,” Academy of Management Journal 46, no. 5 (2003): 591–607; A. Ergeneli, G. Saglam, and S. Metin, “Psychological Empowerment and Its Relationship to Trust in Immediate Managers,” Journal of Business Research, January 2007, 41–49; and S. E. Seibert, S. R. Silver, and W. A. Randolph, “Taking Empowerment to the Next Level: A Multiple-Level Model of Empowerment, Performance, and Satisfaction,” Academy of Management Journal 47, no. 3 (2004): 332–49. 11B. J. Avolio, W. Zhu, W. Koh, and P. Bhatia, “Transformational Leadership and Organizational Commitment: Mediating Role of Psychological Empowerment and Moderating Role of Structural Distance,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 25, no. 8 (2004): 951–68. 12O. N. Solinger, W. van Olffen, and R. A. Roe, “Beyond the Three-Component Model of Organizational Commitment,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93 (2008): 70–83. 13J. P. Hausknecht, N. J. Hiller, and R. J. Vance, “Work-Unit Absenteeism: Effects of Satisfaction, Commitment, Labor Market Conditions, and Time,” Academy of Management Journal 51 (2008): 1223–45. 14“100 Best Companies to Work For,” Fortune, February 2015, www.fortune.com/best- companies/, accessed March 16, 2015. 15L. Rhoades, R. Eisenberger, and S. Armeli, “Affective Commitment to the Organization: The Contribution of Perceived Organizational Support,” Journal of Applied Psychology 86, no. 5 (2001): 825–36. 16B. L. Rich, J. A. Lepine, and E. R. Crawford, “Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effects on Job Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 53 (2010): 617–35.

17J. K. Harter, F. L. Schmidt, and T. L. Hayes, “Business-Unit-Level Relationship between Employee Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, and Business Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no. 2 (2002): 268–79. 18N. R. Lockwood, Leveraging Employee Engagement for Competitive Advantage (Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management, 2007); and R. J. Vance, Employee Engagement and Commitment (Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management, 2006). 19“Employee Engagement,” Workforce Management, February 2013, 19; and “The Cornerstone OnDemand, 2013, U.S. Employee Report,” Cornerstone OnDemand, 2013, www.cornerstoneondemand.com/ resources/research/survey-2013. 20Y. Brunetto, S. T. T. Teo, K. Shacklock, and R. Farr-Wharton, “Emotional Intelligence, Job Satisfaction, Well- being and Engagement: Explaining Organisational Commitment and Turnover Intentions in Policing,” Human Resource Management Journal, 2012, 428–41. 21P. Petrou, E. Demerouti, M. C. W. Peeters, W. B. Schaufeli, and Jørn Hetland, “Crafting a Job on a Daily Basis: Contextual Correlates and the Link to Work Engagement,” Journal of Organizational Behavior, November 2012, 1120–41. 22W. H. Macey and B. Schneider, “The Meaning of Employee Engagement,” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1 (2008): 3–30; and A. Saks, “The Meaning and Bleeding of Employee Engagement: How Muddy Is the Water?” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1 (2008): 40–43. 23C. L. Dolbier, J. A. Webster, K. T. McCalister, M. W. Mallon, and M. A. Steinhardt, “Reliability and Validity of a Single-Item Measure of Job Satisfaction,” American Journal of Health Promotion, January–February 2005, 194–98.

98 PART 2 The Individual

24N. A. Bowling, M. R. Hoepf, D. M. LaHuis, and L. R. Lepisto, “Mean Job Satisfaction Levels over Time: Are Things Bad and Getting Worse?” The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, April 2013, 57–64. 25L. Weber, “U.S. Workers Can’t Get No (Job) Satisfaction,” The Wall Street Journal, June 18, 2014, http://blogs.wsj.com/ atwork/2014/06/18/u-s-workers-cant-get-no- job-satisfaction/. 26“Job Satisfaction: 2014 Edition,” The Conference Board, https://www.conference- board.org/topics/publicationdetail.cfm? publicationid=2785. 27L. Weber, “U.S. Workers Can’t Get No (Job) Satisfaction.” 28World Business Culture, “Doing Business in South Korea,” www.worldbusinessculture .com/Business-in-South-Korea.html, accessed July 29, 2015. 29S. E. Humphrey, J. D. Nahrgang, and F. P. Morgeson, “Integrating Motivational, Social, and Contextual Work Design Features: A Meta-Analytic Summary and Theoretical Extension of the Work Design Literature,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 5 (2007): 1332–56; and D. S. Chiaburu and D. A. Harrison, “Do Peers Make the Place? Conceptual Synthesis and Meta-Analysis of Coworker Effect on Perceptions, Attitudes, OCBs, and Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 5 (2008): 1082–103. 30K. H. Fong and E. Snape, “Empowering Leadership, Psychological Empowerment and Employee Outcomes: Testing a Multi- Level Mediating Model,” British Journal of Management 26 (2015): 126–38. 31S. Ronen, M. Mikulincer, “Predicting Employees’ Satisfaction and Burnout from Managers’ Attachment and Caregiving Orientations,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 21, no. 6 (2012): 828–49. 32A. Calvo-Salguero, J.-M. Salinas Martinez- de-Lecea, and A.-M. Carrasco-Gonzalez, “Work-Family and Family-Work Conflict: Does Intrinsic-Extrinsic Satisfaction Mediate the Prediction of General Job Satisfaction?” The Journal of Psychology 145, no. 5 (2011): 435–61. 33J. Zhang, Q. Wu, D. Miao, X. Yan, and J. Peng, “The Impact of Core Self-Evaluations on Job Satisfaction: The Mediator Role of Career Commitment,” Social Indicators Research 116, no. 3 (2014): 809–22. 34D. Thorpe, “Why CSR? The Benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility Will Move You to Act,” Forbes (May 18, 2013), http://www .forbes.com/sites/devinthorpe/2013/05/18/ why-csr-the-benefits-of-corporate-social- responsibility-will-move-you-to-act/. 35N. Fallon, “What Is Corporate Responsibility?” Business News Daily (December 22, 2014), http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/4679- corporate-social-responsibility.html.

36R. Feintzeig, “I Don’t Have a Job. I Have a Higher Calling,” The Wall Street Journal, February 25, 2015, B1, B4. 37See I. Filatotchev and C. Nakajima, “Corporate Governance, Responsible Managerial Behavior, and Corporate Social Responsibility: Organizational Efficiency ver- sus Organizational Legitimacy?” The Academy of Management Perspectives 28, no. 3 (2014): 289–306. 38A. Hurst, “Being ‘Good’ Isn’t the Only Way to Go,” The New York Times, April 20, 2014, 4. 39D. Thorpe, “Why CSR? The Benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility Will Move You to Act.” 40M. C. Bolino, H.-H. Hsiung, J. Harvey, and J. A. LePine, “’Well, I’m Tired of Tryin’! Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Citizenship Fatigue,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 56–74. 41G. E. Newman and D. M. Cain, “Tainted Altruism: When Doing Some Good Is Evaluated as Doing Worse Than Doing No Good at All,” Psychological Science 25, no. 3 (2014): 648–55. 42Ibid. 43Ibid. 44T. A. Judge, C. J. Thoresen, J. E. Bono, and G. K. Patton, “The Job Satisfaction–Job Performance Relationship: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review,” Psychological Bulletin, May 2001, 376–407. 45See P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, J. B. Paine, and D. G. Bachrach, “Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature and Suggestions for Future Research,” Journal of Management 26, no. 3 (2000): 513–63. 46B. J. Hoffman, C. A. Blair, J. P. Maeriac, and D. J. Woehr, “Expanding the Criterion Domain? A Quantitative Review of the OCB Literature,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 2 (2007): 555–66. 47B. B. Reiche et al., “Why Do Managers Engage in Trustworthy Behavior? A Multilevel Cross-Cultural Study in 18 Countries,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 61–98. 48D. S. Chiaburu and D. A. Harrison, “Do Peers Make the Place? Conceptual Synthesis and Meta-Analysis of Coworker Effect on Perceptions, Attitudes, OCBs, and Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 5 (2008): 1082–103. 49R. Ilies, I. S. Fulmer, M. Spitzmuller, and M. D. Johnson, “Personality and Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Role of Job Satisfaction,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94 (2009): 945–59. 50G. L. Lemoine, C. K. Parsons, and S. Kansara, “Above and Beyond, Again and Again: Self-Regulation in the Aftermath of Organizational Citizenship Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 40–55. 51C. Vandenberghe, K. Bentein, R. Michon, J. Chebat, M. Tremblay, and J. Fils, “An

Examination of the Role of Perceived Support and Employee Commitment in Employee-Customer Encounters,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 4 (2007): 1177–87; and M. Schulte, C. Ostroff, S. Shmulyian, and A. Kinicki, “Organizational Climate Configurations: Relationships to Collective Attitudes, Customer Satisfaction, and Financial Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94 (2009): 618–34. 52B. Taylor, “Why Amazon Is Copying Zappos and Paying Employees to Quit,” Harvard Business Review, April 14, 2014, https://hbr .org/2014/04/why-amazon-is-copying-zappos- and-paying-employees-to-quit/. 53J. Barling, E. K. Kelloway, and R. D. Iverson, “High-Quality Work, Job Satisfaction, and Occupational Injuries,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 2 (2003): 276–83; and F. W. Bond and D. Bunce, “The Role of Acceptance and Job Control in Mental Health, Job Satisfaction, and Work Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 6 (2003): 1057–67. 54Y. Georgellis and T. Lange, “Traditional versus Secular Values and the Job-Life Satisfaction Relationship across Europe,” British Journal of Management 23 (2012): 437–54. 55O. Stavrova, T. Schlosser, and A. Baumert, “Life Satisfaction and Job-Seeking Behavior of the Unemployed: The Effect of Individual Differences in Justice Sensitivity,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 64, no. 4 (2014): 643–70. 56J. Zhou and J. M. George, “When Job Dissatisfaction Leads to Creativity: Encouraging the Expression of Voice,” Academy of Management Journal, August 2001, 682–96; J. B. Olson-Buchanan and W. R. Boswell, “The Role of Employee Loyalty and Formality in Voicing Discontent,” Journal of Applied Psychology, December 2002, 1167–74; and A. Davis-Blake, J. P. Broschak, and E. George, “Happy Together? How Using Nonstandard Workers Affects Exit, Voice, and Loyalty among Standard Employees,” Academy of Management Journal 46, no. 4 (2003): 475–85. 57A. J. Nyberg and R. E. Ployhart, “Context- Emergent Turnover (CET) Theory: A Theory of Collective Turnover,” Academy of Management Review 38 (2013): 109–31. 58P. E. Spector, S. Fox, L. M. Penney, K. Bruursema, A. Goh, and S. Kessler, “The Dimensionality of Counterproductivity: Are All Counterproductive Behaviors Created Equal?” Journal of Vocational Behavior 68, no. 3 (2006): 446–60; and D. S. Chiaburu and D. A. Harrison, “Do Peers Make the Place? Conceptual Synthesis and Meta-Analysis of Coworker Effect on Perceptions, Attitudes, OCBs, and Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 5 (2008): 1082–103. 59P. A. O’Keefe, “Liking Work Really Does Matter,” The New York Times, September 7, 2014, 12.

Attitudes and Job Satisfaction CHAPTER 3 99

60D. Iliescu, D. Ispas, C. Sulea, and A. Ilie, “Vocational Fit and Counterproductive Work Behaviors: A Self-Regulation Perspective,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 21–39. 61A. S. Gabriel, J. M. Diefendorff, M. M. Chandler, C. M. M. Pradco, and G. J. Greguras, “The Dynamic Relationships of Work Affect and Job Satisfaction with Perceptions of Fit,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 389–420. 62S. Diestel, J. Wegge, and K.-H. Schmidt, “The Impact of Social Context on the Relationship between Individual Job Satisfaction and Absenteeism: The Roles of Different Foci of Job Satisfaction and Work- Unit Absenteeism,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 2 (2014): 353–82. 63H. Lian, D. L. Ferris, R. Morrison, and D. J. Brown, “Blame It on the Supervisor or the Subordinate? Reciprocal Relations between Abusive Supervision and Organizational Deviance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 4 (2014): 651–64. 64T. A. Beauregard, “Fairness Perceptions of Work-Life Balance Initiatives; Effects on Counterproductive Work Behavior,” British Journal of Management 25 (2014): 772–89. 65D. Iliescu, D. Ispas, C. Sulea, and A. Ilie, “Vocational Fit and Counterproductive Work Behaviors: A Self-Regulation Perspective.”

66A. S. Gabriel, J. M. Diefendorff, M. M. Chandler, C. M. M. Pradco, and G. J. Greguras, “The Dynamic Relationships of Work Affect and Job Satisfaction with Perceptions of Fit.” 67S. Diestel, J. Wegge, and K.-H. Schmidt, “The Impact of Social Context on the Relationship between Individual Job Satisfaction and Absenteeism: The Roles of Different Foci of Job Satisfaction and Work- Unit Absenteeism.” 68J. F. Ybema, P. G. W. Smulders, and P. M. Bongers, “Antecedents and Consequences of Employee Absenteeism: A Longitudinal Perspective on the Role of Job Satisfaction and Burnout,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 19 (2010): 102–24. 69J. P. Hausknecht, N. J. Hiller, and R. J. Vance, “Work-Unit Absenteeism: Effects of Satisfaction, Commitment, Labor Market Conditions, and Time,” Academy of Management Journal 51, no. 6 (2008): 1123–245. 70G. Chen, R. E. Ployhart, H. C. Thomas, N. Anderson, and P. D. Bliese, “The Power of Momentum: A New Model of Dynamic Relationships between Job Satisfaction Change and Turnover Intentions,” Academy of Management Journal, February 2011, 159–81; and R. W. Griffeth, P. W. Hom, and S. Gaertner, “A Meta-Analysis of Antecedents and Correlates of Employee Turnover:

Update, Moderator Tests, and Research Implications for the Next Millennium,” Journal of Management 26, no. 3 (2000): 479. 71D. Liu, T. R. Mitchell, T. W. Lee, B. C. Holtom, and T. R. Hinkin, “When Employees Are Out of Step with Coworkers: How Job Satisfaction Trajectory and Dispersion Influence Individual- and Unit-Level Voluntary Turnover,” Academy of Management Journal 55, no. 6 (2012): 1360–80. 72T. H. Lee, B. Gerhart, I. Weller, and C. O. Trevor, “Understanding Voluntary Turnover: Path-Specific Job Satisfaction Effects and the Importance of Unsolicited Job Offers,” Academy of Management Journal 51, no. 4 (2008): 651–71. 73K. Jiang, D. Liu, P. F. McKay, T. W. Lee, and T. R. Mitchell, “When and How Is Job Embeddedness Predictive of Turnover? A Meta-Analytic Investigation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012): 1077–96. 74K. Holland, “Inside the Minds of Your Employees,” The New York Times, January 28, 2007, B1; “Study Sees Link between Morale and Stock Price,” Workforce Management, February 27, 2006, 15; and “The Workplace as a Solar System,” The New York Times, October 28, 2006, B5. 75E. White, “How Surveying Workers Can Pay Off,” The Wall Street Journal, June 18, 2007, B3.

S ou

rc e:

J im

R uy

m en

/U PI

/L an

do v

Emotions and Moods4

100

Blowing Up

If you saw the movie The Interview, you probably didn’t see it in a movie theater. Before the comedy about a fictional assassination attempt on North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un could debut, a group named the Guard-

ians of Peace hacked Sony Pictures, stole massive amounts

of data, and threatened terrorism attacks on theaters show-

ing the film. Frightened, movie theater managers refused the

movie and Sony executives canceled the release. North Korea

applauded the decision, while President Obama disagreed. “I think they made a mistake,” he said. “We cannot have a so-

ciety in which some dictators someplace can start imposing

censorship here in the United States.” Sony CEO Michael Lyn- ton still refused to release the film and fired back, “I would

disagree with the notion that it was a mistake.”

When the film finally was released, the North Korean Na-

tional Defense Commission responded angrily. In a comment

many interpreted as racist, one North Korean official said,

“Obama always goes reckless in words and deeds like a mon-

key in a tropical forest.” The U.S. FBI then announced it was

sure North Korea was behind the cyberattack. The North Korean commission

shot back, “If the U.S. persists in American-style arrogant, high-handed and

gangster-like arbitrary practices despite the repeated warnings of the DPRK,

the U.S. should bear in mind that its failed political affairs will face inescap-

able deadly blows.” Specific threats included one to “blow up” the White

House. Were nations—each armed with nuclear weapons—about to go to

war over a movie?

4-1 Differentiate between emotions and moods.

4-2 Identify the sources of emotions and moods.

4-3 Show the impact emotional labor has on employees.

4-4 Describe affective events theory.

4-5 Describe emotional intelligence.

4-6 Identify strategies for emotion regulation.

4-7 Apply concepts about emotions and moods to specific OB issues.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

102 PART 2 The Individual

The hack on Sony Pictures has been called the worst cyberattack in U.S.

history, costing $75 million and including threats of physical harm to Sony em-

ployees, U.S. citizens, and leaders. While his decision to allow the film to be

made at all may be questionable, Lynton may have pulled the film, defied the

president, and emotionally defended his decisions because he feared the pos-

sible consequences of release. He said he learned the value of separating his

emotions from his decisions in this situation. “I take the lesson [that] we—you need to keep a cool and clear and sober mind throughout the process.”

Perhaps the irony is that all this emotional escalation came from a movie

that is at best a political satire, and at worst . . . well, a mediocre film no one

would otherwise have taken seriously. According to reviews, The Interview

was silly, bumbling, and uninteresting. Movie critic Mike Hale of the New

York Times concluded, “The only sensible reaction is amazement at the

huge disconnect between the innocuousness of the film and the vicious-

ness of the response.”

Sources: K. Corcoran, “North Korea Threatens to ‘Blow Up’ the White House after Claim- ing to Find ‘Clear Evidence’ That the Government Was behind Controversial Sony Film The Interview,” Daily Mail.com (December 21, 2014), http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ article-2882696/North-Korea-threatens-blow-White-House-claiming-clear-evidence- GOVERNMENT-controversial-Sony-film-Interview.html; Flixter ratings of The Interview, accessed April 15, 2015; M. Hale, “Memo to Kim Jong-un: Dying Is Easy, Comedy Is Hard,” The New York Times (December 19, 2014), http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/20/arts/the-disconnect-of- the-interview.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytmovies&_r=0; E. Payne, J. Acosta, and K. Liptak, “North Korea Pushes Back against U.S. Sanctions for Sony Hack,” CNN (January 5, 2015), http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/04/politics/north-korea-replies-after-sony-hack- sanctions/; H. Yan and B. Brumfield, “North Korea Lambasts U.S. over ‘The Interview,’ Says Obama Is the ‘Culprit’,” CNN (December 29, 2014), http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/27/ world/asia/north-korea-the-interview-reaction/; and F. Zakaria, “Sony Pictures CEO Michael Lynton ‘We Did Not Cave’,” CNN, (December 21, 2014), http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn. com/2014/12/21/sony-pictures-ceo-michael-lynton-we-did-not-cave/.

As the escalation over The Interview illustrates, emotions can greatly influ-ence decision making, even sparking conflict with potentially disastrous consequences. In truth, we cannot set aside our emotions, but we can acknowl- edge and work with them. And not all emotions have negative influences on us.

Given the obvious role emotions play in our lives, it might surprise you that, until recently, the field of OB has not given the topic of emotions much at- tention. Why? Generally, because emotions in the workplace were historically thought to be detrimental to performance. Although managers knew emotions were an inseparable part of everyday life, they tried to create organizations that were emotion-free. Researchers tended to focus on strong negative emotions— especially anger—that interfered with an employee’s ability to work effectively.

Thankfully, this type of thinking is changing. Certainly some emotions, par- ticularly exhibited at the wrong time, can hinder performance. Other emotions are neutral, and some are constructive. Employees bring their emotions to work every day, so no study of OB would be comprehensive without considering their role in workplace behavior.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 103

What Are Emotions and Moods? In our analysis, we’ll need three terms that are closely intertwined: affect, emo- tions, and moods. Affect is a generic term that covers a broad range of feelings, including both emotions and moods.1 Emotions are intense feelings directed at someone or something.2 Moods are less intense feelings than emotions and often arise without a specific event acting as a stimulus.3 Exhibit 4-1 shows the relationships among affect, emotions, and moods.

First, as the exhibit shows, affect is a broad term that encompasses emotions and moods. Second, there are differences between emotions and moods. Emo- tions are more likely to be caused by a specific event and are more fleeting than moods. Also, some researchers speculate that emotions may be more action- oriented—they may lead us to some immediate action—while moods may be more cognitive, meaning they may cause us to think or brood for a while.4

Affect, emotions, and moods are separable in theory; in practice the dis- tinction isn’t always defined. When we review the OB topics on emotions and moods, you may see more information about emotions in one area and moods in another. This is simply the state of the research. Let’s start with a review of the basic emotions.

The Basic Emotions How many emotions are there? There are dozens, including anger, contempt, enthusiasm, envy, fear, frustration, disappointment, embarrassment, disgust, happiness, hate, hope, jealousy, joy, love, pride, surprise, and sadness. Numer- ous researchers have tried to limit them to a fundamental set.5 Other scholars argue that it makes no sense to think in terms of “basic” emotions, because even emotions we rarely experience, such as shock, can have a powerful effect on us.6

Psychologists have tried to identify basic emotions by studying how we express them. Facial expressions have proved difficult to interpret.7 One problem is that some emotions are too complex to be easily represented on our faces. Second, a

4-1 Differentiate between emotions and moods.

affect A broad range of feelings that people experience.

emotions Intense feelings that are directed at someone or something.

moods Feelings that tend to be less intense than emotions and that lack a contextual stimulus.

Affect, Emotions, and MoodsExhibit 4-1

FPO

Emotions • Caused by specific event • Very brief in duration (seconds or minutes) • Specific and numerous in nature (many specific emotions such as anger, fear, sadness, happiness, disgust, surprise) • Usually accompanied by distinct facial expressions • Action-oriented in nature

Moods • Cause is often general and unclear • Last longer than emotions (hours or days) • More general (two main dimensions— positive affect and negative affect— that are composed of multiple specific emotions) • Generally not indicated by distinct expressions • Cognitive in nature

Affect Defined as a broad range of feelings that people experience. Affect can be experienced in the form of emotions or moods.

104 PART 2 The Individual

recent study suggested that people do not interpret emotions from vocalizations (such as sighs or screams) the same way across cultures. While vocalizations con- veyed meaning in all cultures, the specific emotions people perceived varied. For example, Himba participants (from northwestern Namibia) did not agree with Western participants that crying meant sadness or a growl meant anger.8 Lastly, cultures have norms that govern emotional expression, so the way we experience an emotion isn’t always the same as the way we show it. For example, people in the Middle East and the United States recognize a smile as indicat- ing happiness, but in the Middle East a smile is also often interpreted as a sign of sexual attraction, so women have learned not to smile at men. In collectivist countries, people are more likely to believe another’s emotional displays have something to do with the relationship between them, while people in individu- alistic cultures don’t think others’ emotional expressions are directed at them.

It’s unlikely psychologists or philosophers will ever completely agree on a set of basic emotions, or even on whether there is such a thing. Still, many research- ers agree on six universal emotions—anger, fear, sadness, happiness, disgust, and surprise.9 We sometimes mistake happiness for surprise, but rarely do we confuse happiness and disgust.

Moral Emotions We may tend to think our internal emotions are innate. For instance, if someone jumped out at you from behind a door, wouldn’t you feel surprised? Maybe you would, but you may also feel any of the other five universal emotions— anger,

It is true that a smile is not always an emotional expression. Smiles are used as social currency in most organizations to create a positive at- mosphere, and a smile usually evokes an unconscious reflexive return smile. However, anyone who has ever smiled at an angry manager knows this doesn’t always work. In truth, the giving and withholding of smiles is often an uncon- scious power play of office politics.

Research on the “boss effect” sug- gests that the amount of power and sta- tus a person feels over another person dictates who will smile. Subordinates generally smile more often than their bosses smile back at them. This may happen in part because workers are increasingly expected to show expres- sions of happiness with their jobs. How- ever, the relationship is complex and varies by national culture: in one study, Chinese workers reflexively smiled only at bosses who had the power to give them negative job evaluations, while

U.S. participants smiled most to man- agers perceived to have higher social power. Other researchers found that when individuals felt powerful, they usu- ally didn’t return even a high-ranking individual’s smile. Conversely, when people felt powerless, they returned everyone’s smiles. Thus, “Your feelings about power and status seem to dic- tate how much you are willing to return a smile to another person,” cognitive neuroscientist Evan Carr affirmed.

The science of smiling transcends the expression of emotion. While an angry manager may not smile back, a happy manager might not either, ac- cording to the “boss effect” research. “The relationship of what we show on our face and how we feel is a very loose one,” said Arvid Kappas, a professor of emotion research at Jacobs Univer- sity Bremen in Germany. This suggests that, when we want to display positive emotions to others, we should do more than smile, as service representatives

do when they try to create happy moods in their customers with excited voice pitch, encouraging gestures, and ener- getic body movement.

The science of smiling is an area of current research, but it is clear already that knowing about the “boss effect” suggests many practical applications. For one, managers and employees can be made more aware of ingrained tendencies toward others and, through careful self-observation, change their habits. Comprehensive displays of positive emotion using voice inflection, gestures, and word choice may also be more helpful in building good business relationships than the simple smile.

Sources: R. L. Hotz, “Too Important to Smile Back: The ‘Boss Effect’,” The Wall Street Journal, October 16, 2012, D2; P. Jaskunas, “The Tyranny of the Forced Smile,” The New York Times, February 15, 2015, 14; and E. Kim and D. J. Yoon, “Why Does Service with a Smile Make Employees Happy? A  Social Interaction Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012): 1059–67.

smile, and the Work World smiles with You Myth or Science?

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 105

fear, sadness, happiness, or disgust—depending on the circumstance. Our expe- riences of emotions are closely tied to our interpretations of events.

Researchers have been studying what are called moral emotions; that is, emo- tions that have moral implications because of our instant judgment of the situ- ation that evokes them. Examples of moral emotions include sympathy for the suffering of others, guilt about our own immoral behavior, anger about injustice done to others, and contempt for those who behave unethically.

Another example is the disgust we feel about violations of moral norms, called moral disgust. Moral disgust is different from disgust. Say you stepped in cow dung by mistake—you might feel disgusted by it, but not moral disgust—you probably wouldn’t make a moral judgment. In contrast, say you watched a video of a police officer making a sexist or racist slur. You might feel disgusted in a dif- ferent way because it offends your sense of right and wrong. In fact, you might feel a variety of emotions based on your moral judgment of the situation.10

Interestingly, research indicates that our responses to moral emotions dif- fer from our responses to other emotions.11 When we feel moral anger, for instance, we may be more likely to confront the situation that causes it than when we just feel angry. However, we cannot assume our emotional reactions to events on a moral level will be the same as someone else’s. Moral emotions are learned, usually in childhood,12 and thus they are not universal like innate emo- tions. Because morality is a construct that differs between cultures, so do moral emotions. Therefore, we need to be aware of the moral aspects of situations that trigger our emotions and make certain we understand the context before we act, especially in the workplace.

You can think about this research in your own life to see how moral emo- tions operate. Consider the earthquakes that struck China in 2014. When you heard about the disaster, did you feel emotionally upset about the suffering of others, or did you make more of a rational calculation about their unfortunate situation? Consider a time when you have done something that hurt someone else. Did you feel angry or upset with yourself? Or think about a time when you have seen someone else treated unfairly. Did you feel contempt for the person acting unfairly, or did you engage in a cool, rational calculation of the justice of the situation? Most people who think about these situations have some sense of an emotional stirring that might prompt them to engage in ethical actions like donating money to help others, apologizing and attempting to make amends, or intervening on behalf of those who have been mistreated. In sum, we can conclude that people who are behaving ethically are at least partially making decisions based on their emotions and feelings.

Emotions can be fleeting, but moods can endure . . . for quite a while. In order to understand the impact of emotions and moods in organizations, we next classify the many distinct emotions into broader mood categories.

The Basic Moods: positive and negative Affect As a first step toward studying the effect of moods and emotions in the work- place, we will classify emotions into two categories: positive and negative. Positive emotions—such as joy and gratitude—express a favorable evaluation or feeling. Negative emotions—such as anger and guilt—express the oppo- site. Keep in mind that emotions can’t be neutral. Being neutral is being nonemotional.13

When we group emotions into positive and negative categories, they become mood states because we are now looking at them more generally instead of iso- lating one particular emotion. In Exhibit 4-2, excited is a pure marker of high positive affect, while boredom is a pure marker of low positive affect. Nervous is a pure marker of high negative affect; relaxed is a pure marker of low nega- tive affect. Finally, some emotions—such as contentment and sadness—are in

moral emotions Emotions that have moral implications.

106 PART 2 The Individual

between. You’ll notice this model does not include all emotions. Some, such as surprise, don’t fit well because they’re not as clearly positive or negative.

So, we can think of positive affect as a mood dimension consisting of posi- tive emotions such as excitement, enthusiasm, and elation at the high end (high positive affect). Negative affect is a mood dimension consisting of nervousness, stress, and anxiety at the high end (high negative affect). While we rarely expe- rience both positive and negative affect at the same time, over time people do differ in how much they experience each. Some people (we might call them emotional or intense) may experience quite a bit of high positive and high negative affect over, say, a week’s time. Others (we might call them unemotional or phlegmatic) experience little of either. And still others may experience one much more predominately than the other.

Experiencing Moods and Emotions As if it weren’t complex enough to consider the many distinct emotions and moods a person might identify, the reality is that we all experience moods and emotions differently. For most people, positive moods are somewhat more com- mon than negative moods. Indeed, research finds a positivity offset, meaning that at zero input (when nothing in particular is going on), most individuals experience a mildly positive mood.14 This appears to be true for employees in a wide range of job settings. For example, one study of customer-service represen- tatives in a British call center revealed that people reported experiencing posi- tive moods 58 percent of the time despite the stressful environment.15 Another research finding is that negative emotions lead to negative moods. Perhaps this happens because people think about events that created strong negative emo- tions five times as long as they do about events that created strong positive ones.16

Does the degree to which people experience positive and negative emotions vary across cultures? Yes (see the OB Poll). The reason is not that people of different cultures are inherently different: People in most cultures appear to experience certain positive and negative emotions, and people interpret them in much the same way worldwide. We all view negative emotions such as hate, terror, and rage as dangerous and destructive, and we desire positive emo- tions such as joy, love, and happiness. However, an individual’s experience of emotions appears to be culturally shaped. Some cultures value certain emotions

positive affect A mood dimension that consists of specific positive emotions such as excitement, enthusiasm, and elation at the high end.

negative affect A mood dimension that consists of emotions such as nervousness, stress, and anxiety at the high end.

positivity offset The tendency of most individuals to experience a mildly positive mood at zero input (when nothing in particular is going on).

The Structure of MoodExhibit 4-2

High Negative Affect

Low Positive Affect

High Positive Affect

Low Negative Affect

Tense Alert

Excited

Elated

Happy

Content

Serene

Relaxed

CalmFatigued

Bored

Depressed

Sad

Upset

Stressed

Nervous

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 107

more than others, which leads individuals to change their perspective on expe- riencing these emotions.

There is much to be learned in exploring the value differences. Some cul- tures embrace negative emotions, such as Japan and Russia, while others empha- size positive emotions and expressions, such as Mexico and Brazil.17 There may also be a difference in the value of negative emotions between collectivist and individualist countries. The difference may be the reason negative emotions are less detrimental to the health of Japanese than Americans.18 For example, the Chinese consider negative emotions—while not always pleasant—as potentially more useful and constructive than do people in the United States.

The Chinese may be right: Research has suggested that negative affect can have benefits. Visualizing the worst-case scenario often allows people to accept present circumstances and cope, for instance.19 Negative affect may also allow managers to think more critically and fairly.20

Now that we’ve identified the basic emotions, the basic moods, and our experience of them, let’s explore the function of emotions and moods, particu- larly in the workplace.

The Function of Emotions In some ways, emotions are a mystery. What function do they serve? As we discussed, organizational behaviorists have been finding that emotions can be critical to an effectively functioning workplace. For example, happy employees demonstrate higher performance and organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), fewer CWBs, and less turnover, particularly when they feel supported by their organizations in their effort to do well in their jobs.21 Gratefulness and awe have been shown to positively predict OCB,22 which in turn increases trust and emotional expressions of concern.23 Let’s discuss two critical areas— rationality and ethicality—in which emotions can enhance performance.

Do Emotions Make Us irrational? How often have you heard someone say, “Oh, you’re just being emotional”? You might have been offended. Observations like

*Respondents in 150+ countries worldwide over two years were asked whether they experienced five positive (well-rested, treated with respect, enjoyment,

smiling and laughing, learning or doing something interesting) and five negative emotions (anger, stress, sadness, physical pain, worry) daily.

Source: J. Clifton, “Singapore Ranks as Least Emotional Country in the World,” Gallup (November 21, 2012), http://www.gallup.com/poll/158882/

singapore-ranks-least-emotional-country-world.aspx.

Ob POLL

60%

55%

50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

Percentage of people who reported experiencing emotions on a daily basis*

Philippines

60%

United States

54%

48%

43%

37%

54%

United Kingdom

48%

Taiwan

45%

India

43%

Russia

37%

Singapore

36%

Most Emotional Societies Most Emotionless Societies

emotional states

108 PART 2 The Individual

this suggest that rationality and emotion are in conflict, and by exhibiting emo- tion, you are acting irrationally. The perceived association between the two is so strong that some researchers argue displaying emotions such as sadness to the point of crying is so toxic to a career that we should leave the room rather than allow others to witness it.24 This perspective suggests the demonstration or even experience of emotions can make us seem weak, brittle, or irrational. However, this is wrong. Our emotions actually make our thinking more rational. Why? Because our emotions provide important information about how we under- stand the world around us and they help guide our behaviors. For instance, individuals in a negative mood may be better able to discern truthful from accu- rate information than are people in a happy mood.25

Consider Phineas Gage, a railroad worker in Vermont. One September day in 1848, a 3-foot, 7-inch iron bar propelled by an explosive charge flew into his lower-left jaw and out through the top of his skull. Remarkably, Gage sur- vived his injury, was able to read and speak, and performed well above average on cognitive ability tests. However, he completely lost his ability to experience emotion, which eventually took away his ability to reason. After the accident, he often behaved erratically and against his self-interests. He drifted from job to job, eventually joining a circus. In commenting on Gage’s condition, one expert noted, “Reason may not be as pure as most of us think it is or wish it were . . . emotions and feelings may not be intruders in the bastion of reason at all: they may be enmeshed in its networks, for worse and for better.”26

Do Emotions Make Us Ethical? A growing body of research has begun to exam- ine the relationship between emotions and moral attitudes.27 It was previously believed that, like decision making in general, most ethical decision making was based on higher-order cognitive processes, but the research on moral emotions increasingly questions this perspective. Numerous studies suggest that moral judgments are largely based on feelings rather than on cognition, even though we tend to see our moral boundaries as logical and reasonable, not as emotional.

To some degree, our beliefs are actually shaped by our groups, which influ- ence our perceptions of others, resulting in unconscious responses and a feel- ing that our shared emotions are “right.” Unfortunately, this feeling sometimes allows us to justify purely emotional reactions as rationally “ethical.”28 We also tend to judge outgroup members (anyone who is not in our group) more harshly for moral transgressions than ingroup members, even when we are try- ing to be objective.29 In addition, perhaps to restore an emotional sense of fair play, we are more likely to spitefully want outgroup members to be punished.30

When we can identify the sources of emotions and moods, we are better able to predict behavior and manage people well. Let’s explore that topic next.

Sources of Emotions and Moods Have you ever said, “I got up on the wrong side of the bed today?” Have you ever snapped at a coworker or family member for no reason? If you have, you probably wonder where those emotions and moods originated. Here we discuss some of the primary influences.

personality Moods and emotions have a personality trait component, meaning that some people have built-in tendencies to experience certain moods and emotions more frequently than others do. People also experience the same emotions with different intensities; the degree to which they experience them is called

4-2 Identify the sources of emotions and moods.

By studying brain injuries, such as the injury experienced by Phineas Gage, whose skull is illustrated here, researchers discovered an important link between emotions and rational thinking. They learned that our emotions provide us with valuable information that helps our thinking process. Source: BSIP/Science Source

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 109

their affect intensity.31 Affectively intense people experience both positive and negative emotions more deeply: when they’re sad, they’re really sad, and when they’re happy, they’re really happy.

Time of Day Moods vary by the time of day. However, research suggests most of us actually follow the same pattern. Levels of positive affect tend to peak in the late morn- ing (10 a.m.–noon) and then remain at that level until early evening (around 7 p.m.).32 Starting about 12 hours after waking, positive affect begins to drop until midnight, and then, for those who remain awake, the drop accelerates until positive mood picks up again after sunrise.33As for negative affect, most research suggests it fluctuates less than positive affect,34 but the general trend is for it to increase over the course of a day, so that it is lowest early in the morning and highest late in the evening.35

A fascinating study assessed moods by analyzing millions of Twitter messages from across the globe.36 The researchers noted the presence of words connoting positive affect (happy, enthused, excited) and negative (sad, angry, anxious) affect. You can see the trends they observed in the positive affect part of Exhibit 4-3. Daily fluctuations in mood followed a similar pattern in most countries. These results are comparable to what we reported above from previous research. A major dif- ference, though, happens in the evening. Whereas most research suggests that positive affect tends to drop after 7 p.m., this study suggests that it increases before the midnight decline. We’ll have to wait for further research to see which descrip- tion is accurate. The negative affect trends in this study were more consistent with past research, showing that negative affect is lowest in the morning and tends to increase over the course of the day and evening.

You may wonder what happens for people who work the third shift at night. When our internal circadian process is out of line with our waking hours, our moods and well-being are likely to be negatively affected. However, researchers studying how the body’s inner clock can be adjusted have found that governing our exposure to light may allow us to shift our circadian rhythms.37 Thus, by manipulating light and darkness, someone who is awake at night might have a similar mood cycle to someone who sleeps at night.

Day of the week Are people in their best moods on the weekends? In most cultures that is true—for example, U.S. adults tend to experience their highest positive affect on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and their lowest on Monday.38 As shown in Exhibit 4-4, again based on the study of Twitter messages, that tends to be true in several other cultures as well. For Germans and Chinese, positive affect is highest from Friday to Sunday and lowest on Monday. This isn’t the case in all cultures, however. As the exhibit shows, in Japan positive affect is higher on Monday than on either Friday or Saturday.

As for negative affect, Monday is the highest negative-affect day across most cultures. However, in some countries, negative affect is lower on Friday and Saturday than on Sunday. It may be that while Sunday is enjoyable as a day off (and thus we have higher positive affect), we also get a bit stressed about the week ahead (which is why negative affect is higher).

weather When do you think you would be in a better mood—when it’s 70 degrees and sunny, or on a gloomy, cold, rainy day? Many people believe their mood is tied to the weather. However, a fairly large and detailed body of evidence suggests weather has

affect intensity Individual differences in the strength with which individuals experience their emotions.

110 PART 2 The Individual

Time of Day Effects on Mood of U.S. Adults as Rated from Twitter postings

Exhibit 4-3

SAT MON THU

12 A

M 1A

M 2A

M 3A

M 4A

M 5A

M 6A

M 7A

M 8A

M 9A

M 10

A M

11 A

M 12

PM 1P M

2P M

3P M

4P M

5P M

6P M

7P M

8P M

9P M

10 PM

11 PM

Le ve

l o f

N eg

a ti ve

A ff

ec t

Time of Day

Le ve

l o f

P o si

ti ve

A ff

ec t

Time of Day

SAT MON THU

12 A

M 1A

M 2A

M 3A

M 4A

M 5A

M 6A

M 7A

M 8A

M 9A

M 10

A M

11 A

M 12

PM 1P M

2P M

3P M

4P M

5P M

6P M

7P M

8P M

9P M

10 PM

11 PM

Note: Based on analysis of U.S. Twitter postings and coding of words that represent positive feelings (delight, enthusiasm) and negative feel-

ings (fear, guilt). Lines represent percent of total words in Twitter post that convey these moods.

Sources: Based on S. A. Golder and M. W. Macy, “Diurnal and Seasonal Mood Vary with Work, Sleep, and Daylength Across Diverse Cultures,”

Science 333 (2011): 1878–81; A. Elejalde-Ruiz, “Seize the Day,” Chicago Tribune, September 5, 2012, downloaded June 20, 2013 from

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/.

little effect on mood, at least for most people.39 One expert concluded, “Contrary to the prevailing cultural view, these data indicate that people do not report a better mood on bright and sunny days (or, conversely, a worse mood on dark and rainy days).”40 Illusory correlation, which occurs when we associate two events that

illusory correlation The tendency of people to associate two events when in reality there is no connection.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 111

SUN. MON. FRI. SAT.

USA China Germany Japan

On Sundays, Germans are most negative

On Mondays, negative affect is highest for everyone

Negative affect is lowest on Fridays for U.S. and Chinese

On Saturdays, negative affect is lowest for Germans and Japanese

Day of Week

Le ve

l o f

N eg

a ti ve

A ff

ec t

Day-of-week Mood Effects across Four CulturesExhibit 4-4

Day of Week

Le ve

l o f

P o si

ti ve

A ff

ec t

SUN. MON. FRI. SAT.

USA China Germany Japan

On Sundays positive affect is highest in all four countries

All but Japanese have lowest positive affect on Mondays

For all but Japan, Fridays have more positive affect than Mondays

Germans and U.S. adults are about as happy on Saturdays as on Sundays; Japanese are the least happy

Source: Based on S. A. Golder and M. W. Macy, “Diurnal and Seasonal Mood Vary with Work, Sleep, and Daylength across Diverse

Cultures,” Science 333 (2011): 1878–81; A. Elejalde-Ruiz, “Seize the Day,” Chicago Tribune, September 5, 2012, downloaded June 20,

2013 from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/.

in reality have no connection, explains why people tend to think weather influ- ences them. For example, employees may be more productive on bad weather days, a study in Japan and the United States recently indicated, but not because of mood—instead, the worse weather removed some work distractions.41

112 PART 2 The Individual

Stress As you might imagine, stressful events at work (a nasty e-mail, impending deadline, loss of a big sale, reprimand from the boss, etc.) negatively affect moods. The effects of stress also build over time. As the authors of one study note, “A constant diet of even low-level stressful events has the potential to cause workers to experience gradually increasing levels of strain over time.”42 Mounting levels of stress can worsen our moods, as we experience more negative emotions. Although sometimes we thrive on it, most of us find stress usually takes a toll on our mood. In fact, when situations are overly emotion- ally charged and stressful, we have a natural response to disengage, to literally look away.43

Social Activities Do you tend to be happiest when out with friends? For most people, social activities increase a positive mood and have little effect on a negative mood. But do people in positive moods seek out social interactions, or do social interactions cause people to be in good moods? It seems both are true,44 though the type of social activity does matter. Activities that are physical (skiing or hiking with friends), informal (going to a party), or epicurean (eating with others) are more strongly associated with increases in positive mood than events that are formal (attending a meeting) or sedentary (watching TV with friends).45

Sleep U.S. adults report sleeping less than adults a generation ago.46 According to researchers and public health specialists, a large portion of the U.S. workforce suffers from sleep deprivation: 41 million workers sleep less than 6 hours per night. Sleep quality affects moods and decision making, and increased fatigue puts workers at risk of disease, injury, and depression.47 Poor or reduced sleep also makes it difficult to control emotions. Even one bad night’s sleep makes us more angry and risk-prone,48 possibly because poor sleep impairs job satisfac- tion49 and makes us less able to make ethical judgments.50

On the positive side, increased regular sleep enhances creativity, performance, and career success. University of California-San Diego researchers calculated that for employees who do not sleep enough, “a one-hour increase in long-run aver- age sleep increases wages by 16 percent, equivalent to more than a year of school- ing.”51 Other researchers are trying to reduce how much sleep is needed for high functioning through drug therapy, hoping to find “something better than caffeine,” said Ying-Hui Fu of the University of California-San Francisco.52

Exercise You often hear people should exercise to improve their mood. Does “sweat therapy” really work? It appears so. Research consistently shows exercise enhances peoples’ positive moods.53 While not terribly strong overall, the effects are strongest for those who are depressed.

Age Do young people experience more extreme positive emotions (so-called youth- ful exuberance) than older people? Surprisingly, no. One study of people ages 18 to 94 revealed that negative emotions occur less as people get older. Periods of highly positive moods lasted longer for the study’s older participants, and bad moods faded more quickly.54

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 113

Sex Many believe women are more emotional than men. Is there any truth to this? Evidence does confirm women experience emotions more intensely, tend to “hold onto” emotions longer than men, and display more frequent expressions of both positive and negative emotions, except anger.55 Evidence from a study of participants from 37 different countries found that men consistently reported higher levels of powerful emotions like anger, whereas women reported more powerless emotions like sadness and fear. Thus, there are some sex differences in the experience and expression of emotions.56

People also tend to attribute men’s and women’s emotions in ways that might be based on stereotypes of typical emotional reactions. One study showed that when viewing pictures of faces, participants interpreted the women’s emotional expressions as being dispositional (related to personality), whereas the men’s expressions were interpreted as situational.57 For example, a picture of a sad woman led observers to believe she had an emotional personality, whereas a pic- ture of sadness in a man was more likely to be attributed to having a bad day. Another study showed that participants were quicker to detect angry expressions on male faces and happy expressions on female faces; neutral faces in men were attributed as more angry and neutral faces in women were interpreted as happy.58

It might seem by now that we all—leaders, managers, and employees alike— operate as unwitting slaves to our emotions and moods. On an internal experi- ential level, this may be true. Yet we know from our workplace experiences that people aren’t expressing every brief emotion that flits through their conscious- ness. Let’s put together what we’ve learned about emotions and moods with workplace coping strategies, beginning with emotional labor.

Emotional Labor If you’ve ever had a job in retail, sales, or waited on tables in a restaurant, you know the importance of projecting a friendly demeanor and smiling. Even though there were days when you didn’t feel cheerful, you knew management expected you to be upbeat when dealing with customers, so you faked it.

Every employee expends physical and mental labor by putting body and mind, respectively, into the job. But jobs also require emotional labor, an employee’s expression of organizationally desired emotions during interper- sonal transactions at work. Emotional labor is a key component of effective job

4-3 Show the impact emotional labor has on employees.

emotional labor A situation in which an employee expresses organizationally desired emotions during interpersonal transactions at work.

Staples believes that exercise in- creases positive moods and results in happier, healthier, and more productive employees. At company headquarters, the office supply retailer offers em- ployees onsite strength training and cardiovascular conditioning classes during their lunch hour, including a “truck push” (shown here), military crawls, and other boot-camp-type activities. Source: Boston Globe/Getty Images

114 PART 2 The Individual

performance. We expect flight attendants to be cheerful, funeral directors to be sad, and doctors emotionally neutral. At the least, your managers expect you to be courteous, not hostile, in your interactions with coworkers.

The way we experience an emotion is obviously not always the same as the way we show it. To analyze emotional labor, we divide emotions into felt or dis- played emotions.59 Felt emotions are our actual emotions. In contrast, displayed emotions are those the organization requires workers to show and considers appropriate in a given job. They’re not innate; they’re learned, and they may or may not coincide with felt emotions. For instance, research suggests that in U.S. workplaces, it is expected that employees should typically display positive emo- tions like happiness and excitement and suppress negative emotions like fear, anger, disgust, and contempt.60

Effective managers have learned to look serious when they give an employee a negative performance evaluation, and to look calm when they are berated by their bosses, because the organization expects these displays. Of course, there are no display rules for many workplace situations. Does your employer dictate what emotions you display when you are, say, heading out for lunch? Probably not. Many workplaces have explicit display rules, but usually only for interactions that matter, particularly between employees and customers. Regarding employee and customer interactions, you might expect that the more an employer dictates sales- people’s emotional displays, the higher the sales. Actually, employees under very high or very low display rules do not perform as well in sales situations as employ- ees who have moderate display rules and a high degree of discretion in their roles.61Displaying fake emotions requires us to suppress real ones. Surface acting is hiding inner feelings and emotional expressions in response to display rules. A worker who smiles at a customer even when he doesn’t feel like it is surface acting. Deep acting is trying to modify our true inner feelings based on display rules. Sur- face acting deals with displayed emotions, and deep acting deals with felt emotions.

Displaying emotions we don’t really feel can be exhausting. Surface acting is associated with increased stress and decreased job satisfaction.62 Surface acting on a daily basis can also lead to emotional exhaustion at home, work-family con- flict, and insomnia.63 On the other hand, deep acting has a positive relationship with job satisfaction and job performance.64 We also experience less emotional exhaustion with deep acting.

felt emotions An individual’s actual emotions.

displayed emotions Emotions that are organizationally required and considered appropriate in a given job.

surface acting Hiding one’s inner feelings and forgoing emotional expressions in response to display rules.

deep acting Trying to modify one’s true inner feelings based on display rules.

Employees of Apple’s store in Manhattan, New York, greet custom- ers with enthusiasm and excitement as they exit the store after buying an iPhone 6 on its first day of sales. Employees’ smiles and high fives are expressions of emotional labor that Apple requires and considers appropriate for their jobs. Source: Adrees Latif/Reuters/Landov

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 115

When employees have to project one emotion while feeling another, this dis- parity is called emotional dissonance. Bottled-up feelings of frustration, anger, and resentment can lead to emotional exhaustion. Long-term emotional dis- sonance is a predictor for job burnout, declines in job performance, and lower job satisfaction.65

It is important to counteract the effects of emotional labor and emotional dissonance. Research in the Netherlands and Belgium indicated that while sur- face acting is stressful to employees, mindfulness—objectively and deliberately evaluating our emotional situation in the moment—was negatively correlated with emotional exhaustion and positively affected job satisfaction.66 Mindful- ness is one of several emotion regulation techniques that we will discuss later in this text. Beyond emotion regulation, employees who engage in surface dis- plays should be given a chance to relax and recharge. For example, a study that looked at how cheerleading instructors spent their breaks from teaching found those who used the time to rest and relax were more effective after their breaks than those who did chores during their breaks.67 Lastly, employees who can depersonalize or standardize their work interactions that require emotional labor may be able to successfully carry on their acting while thinking of other tasks, thus bypassing the emotional impact.68

The concept of emotional labor makes intuitive and organizational sense. Affective events theory, discussed in the next section, fits a job’s emotional labor requirements into a construct with implications for work events, emotional reac- tions, job satisfaction, and job performance.

Affective Events Theory We’ve seen that emotions and moods are an important part of our personal and work lives. But how do they influence our job performance and satisfaction? Affective events theory (AET) proposes that employees react emotionally to things that happen to them at work, and this reaction influences their job per- formance and satisfaction.69 Say you just found out your company is downsizing. You might experience a variety of negative emotions, causing you to worry that you’ll lose your job. Because it is out of your hands, you feel insecure and fear- ful, and spend much of your time worrying rather than working. Needless to say, your job satisfaction will also be down.

Work events trigger positive or negative emotional reactions, to which employ- ees’ personalities and moods predispose them to respond with greater or lesser intensity.70 People who score low on emotional stability are more likely to react strongly to negative events, and our emotional response to a given event can change depending on mood. Finally, emotions influence a number of perfor- mance and satisfaction variables, such as OCB, organizational commitment, level of effort, intention to quit, and workplace deviance.

In sum, AET offers two important messages.71 First, emotions provide valu- able insights into how workplace events influence employee performance and satisfaction. Second, employees and managers shouldn’t ignore emotions or the events that cause them, even when they appear minor, because they accumu- late. Emotional intelligence is another framework that helps us understand the impact of emotions on job performance, so we will look at that next.

Emotional Intelligence As the CEO of an international talent company, Terrie Upshur-Lupberger was at a career pinnacle. So why was she resentful and unhappy? A close friend observed, “Terrie, you were out on the skinny branch—you know, the one

emotional dissonance Inconsistencies between the emotions people feel and the emotions they project.

mindfulness Objectively and deliberately evaluating the emotional situation in the moment.

4-4 Describe affective events theory. affective events theory (AET) A model that suggests that workplace events cause emotional reactions on the part of employees, which then influence workplace attitudes and behaviors.

4-5 Describe emotional intelligence.

116 PART 2 The Individual

that breaks easily in a strong wind. You were so busy and overwhelmed and out of touch with your own values, cares, and guiding beliefs that you failed to pay attention to the branch that was about to break.”72 According to Upshur- Lupberger, she had failed to notice that her moods constantly swung toward frustration and exhaustion. Her job satisfaction, productivity, relationships, and results suffered. Worst, she was too busy to realize the deficiencies until she was completely depleted.73 She said, “I learned that, as a leader, you either pay attention to and manage the moods (including your own) in the organization, or . . . you ignore them and pay the price.” Upshur-Lupberger learned the value of emotional intelligence.

Emotional intelligence (EI) is a person’s ability to (1) perceive emotions in  the self and others, (2) understand the meaning of these emotions, and (3)  regulate his or her own emotions accordingly, as shown in Exhibit 4-5. People who know their own emotions and are good at reading emotional cues— for instance, knowing why they’re angry and how to express themselves without violating norms—are most likely to be effective.74

Several studies suggest EI plays an important role in job performance. One study that used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technol- ogy found that executive MBA students who performed best on a strategic decision-making task were more likely to incorporate emotion centers of the brain into their choice process.75 One simulation study showed that students who were good at identifying and distinguishing among their own feelings were able to make more profitable investment decisions.76 For an overall per- spective, research studied 11 U.S. presidents—from Franklin Roosevelt to Bill  Clinton—and evaluated them on six qualities: communication, organi- zation, political skill, vision, cognitive style, and emotional intelligence. The key quality that differentiated the successful (such as Roosevelt, Kennedy, and Reagan) from the unsuccessful (such as Johnson, Carter, and Nixon) was emotional intelligence.77

Although the field is progressing in its understanding of EI, many ques- tions have not been answered. One relates to proving what EI may predict. For example, while evidence indicates that EI has some correlation with job perfor- mance, the correlation isn’t high, and it is explained to a large degree by traits such as emotional stability. A second question is about the reliability of EI test- ing. For example, part of the reason EI has only a modest correlation with job effectiveness is that it is hard to measure—mostly it is measured with self-report inventories, which of course are often far from objective!

emotional intelligence (EI) The ability to detect and to manage emotional cues and information.

A Cascading Model of Emotional intelligenceExhibit 4-5

Perceive Emotions in Self and Others

Understand the Meaning of Emotions

Regulate Emotions

Conscientiousness

Cognitive

Emotional Stability

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 117

A s we discussed in this chapter, the concept of emotional intelli-gence has raised some debate. One of the questions for managers is whether to use EI tests in the selec- tion process. Here are some ethical considerations:

• There is no commonly accepted test. For instance, researchers have recently used the Mayer–Salovey– Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT), the Trait Emotional Intel- ligence Questionnaire, and the Situ- ational Judgment Test of Emotional Intelligence (SJT of EI) in studies. Researchers feel EI tests may need to be culturally specific because emotional displays vary by culture; thus, the interpretation of emotional cues differs. For example, a recent study comparing the emotional intel- ligence scores for Indian and North American executives using the Emo- tional Competence Inventory (ECI-2) test found the results similar but not the same, suggesting the need for modification.

• Applicants may react negatively to taking an EI test in general, or to parts of it. The face recognition test, for example, may seem culturally biased to some if the subject photos

are not diverse. Also, participants who score high on EI tests tend to consider them fair; applicants who score lower may not perceive the tests to be fair and can thus view the hiring organizations unfavor- ably—even if they score well on other assessments.

• EI tests may not be predictive of performance for all types of jobs. In a study of 600 Romanian participants, results indicated that EI was valid for salespeople, public servants, and CEOs of public hospitals, but these were all roles requiring significant social interaction. EI tests may need to be tailored for each position cat- egory or not be used when the posi- tion description does not warrant.

• It remains somewhat unclear what EI tests are actually measuring. They may reflect personality or intelli- gence, in which case other mea- sures might be better. Also, mixed EI tests may predict job performance, but many of these tests include per- sonality constructs and measures of general mental ability.

• There is not enough research on how emotional intelligence affects, for instance, counterproductive work behavior (CWB). It may not be prudent to test and select applicants

who are rated high on EI when we aren’t yet certain that everything about EI leads to desired workplace outcomes.

These concerns suggest EI tests should be avoided in hiring decisions. However, because research has indicat- ed that emotional intelligence does pre- dict job performance to some degree, managers should not be too hasty to dismiss them altogether. Rather, those wishing to use EI in hiring decisions should be aware of these issues to make informed and ethical decisions about not only whom to hire, but how.

Sources: D. Iliescu, A. Ilie, D. Ispas, and A. Ion, “Emotional Intelligence in Personnel Selection: Applicant Reactions, Criterion, and Incremental Validity,” International Jour- nal of Selection and Assessment ( September 2012): 347–58; D. L. Joseph, J. Jin, D. A. Newman, and E. H. O’Boyle, “Why Does Self- Reported Emotional Intelligence Predict Job Performance? A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Mixed EI,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 2 (2015): 298–342; “R. Sharma, “Measuring Social and Emotional Intelli- gence Competencies in the Indian Context,” Cross Cultural Management 19 (2012): 30–47; and S. Sharma, M. Gangopadhyay, E. Austin, and M. K. Mandal, “Development and Validation of a Situational Judgment Test of Emotional Intelligence,” International Journal of Selection and Assessment (March 2013): 57–73.

should Managers Use emotional intelligence (ei) tests? An Ethical Choice

All questions aside, EI is wildly popular among consulting firms and in the popular press, and it has accumulated some support in the research literature. Love it or hate it, one thing is for sure—EI is here to stay. So might be our next topic, emotion regulation, which is increasingly studied as an independent concept.78

PErSOnAl InvEnTOry ASSESSmEnTS Emotional Intelligence Assessment Have you always been able to “read” others well? Do people say you seem to have “the right thing to say” for every occasion? Complete this PIA to determine your emotional intelligence (EI).

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

118 PART 2 The Individual

Emotion Regulation Have you ever tried to cheer yourself up when you’re feeling down, or calm yourself when you’re feeling angry? If so, you have engaged in emotion regulation. The central idea behind emotion regulation is to identify and modify the emo- tions you feel. Recent research suggests that emotion management ability is a strong predictor of task performance for some jobs and for OCB.79 Therefore, in our study of OB, we are interested in whether and how emotion regulation should be used in the workplace. We begin by identifying which individuals might naturally employ it.

Emotion Regulation influences and outcomes As you might suspect, not everyone is equally good at regulating emotions. Individuals who are higher in the personality trait of neuroticism have more trouble doing so and often find their moods are beyond their ability to control. Individuals who have lower levels of self-esteem are also less likely to try to im- prove their sad moods, perhaps because they are less likely than others to feel they deserve to be in a good mood.80

The workplace environment has an effect on an individual’s tendency to employ emotion regulation. In general, diversity in work groups increases the likelihood that you will regulate your emotions. For example, younger employees are likely to regulate their emotions when their work groups include older mem- bers.81 Racial diversity also has an effect: if diversity is low, the minority will engage in emotion regulation, perhaps to “fit in” with the majority race as much as pos- sible; if diversity is high and many different races are represented, the majority race will employ emotion regulation, perhaps to integrate themselves with the whole group.82 These findings suggest a beneficial outcome of diversity—it may cause us to regulate our emotions more consciously and effectively.

While regulating your emotions might seem beneficial, research suggests there is a downside to trying to change the way you feel. Changing your emo- tions takes effort, and as we noted when discussing emotional labor, this effort can be exhausting. Sometimes attempts to change an emotion actually make the emotion stronger; for example, trying to talk yourself out of being afraid can make you focus more on what scares you, which makes you more afraid.83 From another perspective, research suggests that avoiding negative emotional experiences is less likely to lead to positive moods than does seeking out positive emotional experiences.84 For example, you’re more likely to experience a posi- tive mood if you have a pleasant conversation with a friend than if you avoid an unpleasant conversation with a hostile coworker.

Emotion Regulation Techniques Researchers of emotion regulation often study the strategies people employ to change their emotions. One technique we have discussed in this chapter is sur- face acting, or literally “putting on a face” of appropriate response to a given situation. Surface acting doesn’t change the emotions, though, so the regula- tion effect is minimal, and the result of daily surface acting leads to exhaustion and fewer OCBs.85 Perhaps due to the costs of creatively expressing what we don’t feel, individuals who vary their surface-acting response may have lower job satisfaction and higher levels of work withdrawal than those who consistently give the same responses.86

Deep acting, another technique we have covered, is less psychologically costly than surface acting because the employee is actually trying to experi- ence the emotion. Emotion regulation through deep acting can have a positive

4-6 Identify strategies for emotion regulation.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 119

impact on work outcomes. For example, a recent study in the Netherlands and Germany found that individuals in service jobs earned significantly more direct pay (tips) after they received training in deep acting.87

One technique of emotion regulation is emotional suppression, or suppressing initial emotional responses to situations. This response seems to facilitate prac- tical thinking in the short term. However, it appears to be helpful only when a strongly negative event would illicit a distressed emotional reaction in a crisis situation.88 For example, a soldier in battle may suppress initial emotional dis- tress after a shooting and thus be able to make clearer decisions about how to proceed. A portfolio manager might suppress an emotional reaction to a sud- den drop in the value of a stock and therefore be able to clearly decide how to plan. Suppression used in crisis situations appears to help an individual recover from the event emotionally, while suppression used as an everyday emotion regulation technique can take a toll on mental ability, emotional ability, health, and relationships.89

Thus, unless we’re truly in a crisis situation, acknowledging rather than suppressing our emotional responses to situations, and re-evaluating events after they occur, yield the best outcomes.90 Cognitive reappraisal, or reframing our outlook on an emotional situation, is one way to effectively regulate emo- tions.91 Cognitive reappraisal ability seems to be the most helpful to individu- als in situations where they cannot control the sources of stress.92 A recent study illustrates the potentially powerful effect of this technique. Israeli participants who were shown anger-inducing information about the Israeli- Palestinian conflict after they were primed to reappraise the situation showed more inclination toward conciliation and less inclination toward aggressive tactics against Palestinians than the control group, not only immediately after the study but up to 5 months later. This result suggests that cognitive reap- praisal may allow people to change their emotional responses, even when the subject matter is as highly emotionally charged as the Israeli-Palestinian con- flict.93 Mindfulness also has been shown to increase the ability to shape our behavioral responses to emotions.94 When people become non-judgmentally

New employees of the ward office in the city of Daejeon, South Korea, practice smiling during their training on how to be kind public employees. The strategy of surface acting, or “putting on a face,” is an appropriate technique the employees learn for modifying their emotions that helps them create positive interactions with customers. Source: Yonhap News/YNA/Newscom

120 PART 2 The Individual

aware of the emotions they are experiencing, they are better able to look at situations separately from their emotions.

Another technique with potential for emotion regulation is social sharing, or venting. Research shows that the open expression of emotions can help individu- als to regulate their emotions, as opposed to keeping emotions “bottled up.” Social sharing can reduce anger reactions when people can talk about the facts of a bad situation, their feelings about the situation, or any positive aspects of the situation.95 Caution must be exercised, though, because expressing your frustra- tion affects other people. In fact, whether venting emotions helps the “venter” feel better depends very much upon the listener’s response. If the listener doesn’t respond (many refuse to respond to venting), the venter actually feels worse. If the listener responds with expressions of support or validation, the venter feels better. Therefore, if we are going to vent to a coworker, we need to choose some- one who will respond sympathetically. Venting to the perceived offender rarely improves things and can result in heightening the negative emotions.96

While emotion regulation techniques can help us cope with difficult workplace situations, research indicates that the effect varies. For example, a recent study in Taiwan found that all participants who worked for abusive supervisors reported emotional exhaustion and work withdrawal tendencies, but to different degrees based on the emotion regulation strategies they employed. Employees who used suppression techniques suffered greater emotional exhaustion and work with- drawal than employees who used cognitive reappraisal. This suggests that more research on the application of techniques needs to be done to help employees increase their coping skills.97

Thus, while there is much promise in emotion regulation techniques, the best route to a positive workplace is to recruit positive-minded individuals and train leaders to manage their moods, job attitudes, and performance.98 The best leaders manage emotions as much as they do tasks and activities. The best employees can use their knowledge of emotion regulation to decide when to speak up and how to express themselves effectively.99

Ethics of Emotion Regulation Emotion regulation has important ethical implications. On one end of the con- tinuum, some people might argue that controlling your emotions is unethical because it requires a degree of acting. On the other end, other people might argue that all emotions should be controlled so you can take a dispassionate perspective. Both arguments—and all arguments in between—have ethical pros and cons you will have to decide for yourself. Consider the reasons for emotion regulation and the outcomes. Are you regulating your emotions so you don’t react inappropriately, or are you regulating your emotions so no one knows what you are thinking? Finally, consider this: you may be able to “fake it ‘til you make it.” Recent research has found that acting like you are in a good mood might put you in a good mood. In one study, a group of participants was asked to hold only an efficient conversation with a barista serving them at Starbucks, while another group was asked to act happy. The happy actors reported later that they were in much better moods.100

Now that we have studied the role of emotions and moods in organizational behavior, let’s consider the opportunities for more specific applications that our understanding provides.

WATCH IT! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled East Haven Fire Department: Emotions and Moods.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 121

OB Applications of Emotions and Moods Our understanding of emotions and moods can affect many aspects of organizational behavior including the selection process, decision making, creativity, motivation, leadership, negotiation, customer service, job attitudes, deviant workplace behavior, and safety. Let’s think through each of these.

Selection One implication from the evidence on EI is that employers should consider it a factor in hiring employees, especially for jobs that demand a high degree of social interaction. In fact, more employers are starting to use EI measures to hire people. For example, a study of U.S. Air Force recruiters showed that top-performing recruiters exhibited high levels of EI. Using these findings, the Air Force revamped its selection criteria. A follow-up investigation found hires who had high EI scores were 2.6 times more successful than those who didn’t.

Decision Making Moods and emotions have effects on decision making that managers should understand. Positive emotions and moods seem to help people make sound decisions. Positive emotions also enhance problem-solving skills, so positive people find better solutions.101

OB researchers continue to debate the role of negative emotions and moods in decision making. One recent study suggested that people who are saddened by events may make the same decisions as before, while people who are angered by events might make stronger (though not necessarily better) choices than before.102 Another study found that participants made choices reflecting more originality in a negative mood.103 Still other research indicated that individu- als in a negative mood may take higher risks than when in a positive mood.104 Taken together, these and other studies suggest negative (and positive) emotions impact decision making, but that there are other variables which require further research.105

4-7 Apply concepts about emotions and moods to specific OB issues.

A leader of high emotional intelligence, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz bounds on stage before addressing 10,000 Starbucks managers at the firm’s Global Leadership Conference. Schultz’s optimism, excitement, and enthusiasm energize employees and motivate them to accept his vision of the company’s future. Source: F. Carter Smith/Bloomberg/Getty Images

122 PART 2 The Individual

Creativity As we see throughout this text, one goal of leadership is to maximize employee productivity through creativity. Creativity is influenced by emotions and moods, but there are two schools of thought on the relationship. Much research sug- gests that people in good moods tend to be more creative than people in bad moods.106 People in good moods produce more ideas and more options, and others think their ideas are original.107 It seems that people experiencing posi- tive moods or emotions are more flexible and open in their thinking, which may explain why they’re more creative.108 Supervisors should actively try to keep em- ployees happy because doing so creates more good moods (employees like their leaders to encourage them and provide positive feedback on a job well done), which in turn leads people to be more creative.109

Some researchers, however, do not believe a positive mood makes people more creative. They argue that when people are in positive moods, they may relax (“If I’m in a good mood, things must be going okay, and I don’t need to think of new ideas”) and not engage in the critical thinking necessary for some forms of creativity.110 Individuals who worry more may perform better on creative tasks than those who are less neurotic.

Determining which perspective is correct may lie in thinking of moods some- what differently. Rather than looking at positive or negative affect, it’s possible to conceptualize moods as active feelings like anger, fear, or elation and con- trast these with deactivating moods like sorrow, depression, or serenity. All the activating moods, whether positive or negative, seem to lead to more creativity, whereas deactivating moods lead to less.111 We discussed earlier that other fac- tors such as fatigue may boost creativity. A study of 428 students found they performed best on a creative problem-solving task when they were fatigued, suggesting that tiredness may free the mind to consider novel solutions.112

Motivation Several studies have highlighted the importance of moods and emotions on mo- tivation. One study asked two groups of people to solve word puzzles. The first group saw a funny video clip intended to put them in a good mood first. The other group was not shown the clip and started working on the puzzles right away. The positive-mood group reported higher expectations of being able to solve the puzzles, worked harder at them, and did solve more as a result.113 Another study looked at the moods of insurance sales agents in Taiwan.114 Agents in a good mood were found to be more helpful toward their coworkers and also felt better about themselves. These factors in turn led to superior performance in the form of higher sales and better supervisor reports of performance.

Giving people performance feedback—whether real or fake—influences their mood, which then influences their motivation.115 A cycle can be created in which positive moods cause people to be more creative, leading to positive feedback from those observing their work. The feedback further reinforces the positive mood, which makes people perform even better, and so on. Overall, the findings suggest a manager may enhance employee motivation—and performance—by encouraging good moods.

leadership Research indicates that putting people in a good mood makes good sense. Leaders who focus on inspirational goals generate greater optimism, coopera- tion, and enthusiasm in employees, leading to more positive social interactions with coworkers and customers.116 A study with Taiwanese military participants indicates that by sharing emotions, transformational leaders inspire positive emotions in their followers that lead to higher task performance.117

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 123

Leaders are perceived as more effective when they share positive emotions, and followers are more creative in a positive emotional environment. What about when leaders are sad? Research found that leader displays of sadness increased the analytic performance of followers, perhaps because followers attended more closely to tasks to help the leaders.118

Corporate executives know emotional content is critical for employees to buy into their vision of the company’s future and accept change. When higher- ups offer new visions, especially with vague or distant goals, it is often difficult for employees to accept the changes they’ll bring. By arousing emotions and linking them to an appealing vision, leaders may help managers and employees alike to accept change and feel connected to the new plan.

negotiation Have you considered the potential of using emotions and moods to enhance your negotiation skills? Several studies suggest that a negotiator who feigns anger has an advantage over an opponent. Why? Because when a negotiator shows anger, the opponent concludes the negotiator has conceded all he or she can and so gives in.119 However, anger should be used selectively in negotiation: angry negotiators who have less information or less power than their opponents have significantly worse outcomes.120

As in the use of any emotion, context matters. Displaying a negative emotion (such as anger) can be effective, but feeling bad about your performance appears to impair future negotiations. Individuals who do poorly in negotiation experi- ence negative emotions, develop negative perceptions of their counterparts, and are less willing to share information or be cooperative in future negotiations.121

Altogether, the best negotiators are probably those who remain emotionally detached. One study of people who suffered damage to the emotional centers of their brains suggested that unemotional people may be the best negotiators because they’re not likely to overcorrect when faced with negative outcomes.122

Customer Service Workers’ emotional states influence the level of customer service they give, which in turn influences levels of repeat business and customer satisfaction.123 This result is primarily due to emotional contagion—the “catching” of emotions from others.124 When someone experiences positive emotions and laughs and smiles at you, you tend to respond positively. Of course, the opposite is true as well.

Studies indicate a matching effect between employee and customer emotions. In the employee-to-customer direction, research finds that customers who catch the positive moods or emotions of employees shop longer. In the other direction, when an employee feels unfairly treated by a customer, it’s harder for him to display the positive emotions his organization expects.125 High-quality customer service makes demands on employees because it often puts them in a state of emotional dissonance, which can be damaging to the employee and the organi- zation. Managers can interrupt negative contagion by fostering positive moods.

Job Attitudes There is good news and bad news about the relationship between moods and job attitudes, in that both are affected by work and home events. Ever hear the advice “Never take your work home with you,” meaning you should forget about work once you go home? That’s easier said than done. The good news is that it appears a positive mood at work can spill over to your off-work hours, and a negative mood at work can be restored to a positive mood after a break. Several studies have shown people who had a good day at work tend to be in a better mood at home that evening, and vice versa.126 Other research has found

emotional contagion The process by which peoples’ emotions are caused by the emotions of others.

124 PART 2 The Individual

My boss is a yeller. One time, he kicked my chair and yelled for me to get out of the office just because I’d forgotten to tell him that lunch had been delivered. His rage makes me so mad I want to yell back, but I don’t because it isn’t professional. Is there a way to get him to think before he fumes?

— Leslie Dear Leslie: We feel for you! Actually, your internal anger response is perfectly normal. Al- most everyone has an emotional reac- tion to screaming and other situations of workplace incivility like swearing and rude behavior, and a majority of em- ployees react somehow. For example, 66 percent of participants in a recent study reported their performance de- clined when they were the recipients of incivility, and 25 percent admitted they took their frustration out on customers. Another study found that verbal aggres- sion reduces victims’ working memory, making even simple instructions dif- ficult to follow. So you’re right to want to strategize how to calm the situation

since it hurts you, your coworkers, and the company.

The good news is that you can work on your reactions to de-escalate an episode. Experts suggest empathizing with your boss (often we find if we try to understand where someone is com- ing from, it helps us deal with the emo- tions more effectively), apologizing if you’ve done something wrong, and not talking back (incivility is never cured by payment in kind). Find situations where you can laugh over mutual frustrations and don’t take his outbursts personally.

The bad news is that you probably can’t change his emotional response to incidents, but you may be able to help him see the error of his ways by modeling better behavior. Of course, there are sit- uations in which you cannot and should not tolerate uncivil behavior (such as when you are being threatened or when the behavior becomes truly abusive). In those cases, you may need to deal with the situation more directly by first calmly confronting your boss or, if that fails, seeing someone in human resources.

But short of that breaking point, our ex- perience and the research suggest that your best response is not to respond outwardly but rather to rethink the way you are responding inwardly.

As the British poster says, “Keep calm and carry on!”

Sources: C. Porath and C. Pearson, “The Price of Incivility,” Harvard Business Review (January–February 2013): 114–21; A. Rafaeli et al., “When Customers Exhibit Verbal Aggression, Employees Pay Cognitive Costs,” Journal of Applied Psychology (September 2012): 931–50; S. Shellenbarger, “’It’s Not My Fault!’ A Better Response to Criti- cism at Work,” The Wall Street Journal, June 18, 2014, D1, D4; and S. Shellenbarger, “When the Boss Is a Screamer,” The Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2012, D1, D2.

The opinions provided here are of the authors only. The authors are not respon- sible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this in- formation. In no event will the authors, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reli- ance on the opinions provided here.

How do i turn down the volume on my screaming boss? Career oBjectives

that although people do emotionally take their work home with them, by the next day the effect is usually gone.127 The bad news is that the moods of your household may interfere with yours. As you might expect, one study found if one member of a couple was in a negative mood during the workday, the nega- tive mood spilled over to the spouse at night.128 Thus, the relationship between moods and job attitudes is reciprocal—the way our workday goes colors our moods, but our moods also affect the way we see our jobs.

Deviant workplace Behaviors Anyone who has spent much time in an organization realizes people can behave in ways that violate established norms and threaten the organization, its members, or both. As we saw in Chapter 1, these actions are called counterproductive work behaviors (CWB).129 They can be traced to negative emotions and can take many forms. People who feel negative emotions are more likely than others to engage in short-term deviant behavior at work, such as gossiping or surfing the Internet,130 though negative emotions can also lead to more serious forms of CWB.

For instance, envy is an emotion that occurs when you resent someone for having something you don’t have but strongly desire—such as a better work assignment, larger office, or higher salary. It can lead to malicious deviant behaviors. An envious employee could undermine other employees and take all the credit for things others accomplished. Angry people look for other people

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 125

to blame for their bad mood, interpret other people’s behavior as hostile, and have trouble considering others’ points of view.131 It’s also not hard to see how these thought processes can lead directly to verbal or physical aggression.

A recent study in Pakistan found that anger correlated with more aggressive CWBs such as abuse against others and production deviance, while sadness did not. Interestingly, neither anger nor sadness predicted workplace withdrawal, which suggests that managers need to take employee expressions of anger seriously; employees may stay with an organization and continue to act aggres- sively toward others.132 Once aggression starts, it’s likely that other people will become angry and aggressive, so the stage is set for a serious escalation of nega- tive behavior. Managers therefore need to stay connected with their employees to gauge emotions and emotional intensity levels.

Safety and injury at work Research relating negative affectivity to increased injuries at work suggests em- ployers might improve health and safety (and reduce costs) by ensuring workers aren’t engaged in potentially dangerous activities when they’re in a bad mood. Bad moods can contribute to injury at work in several ways.133 Individuals in negative moods tend to be more anxious, which can make them less able to cope effectively with hazards. A person who is always fearful will be more pes- simistic about the effectiveness of safety precautions because she feels she’ll just get hurt anyway, or she might panic or freeze up when confronted with a threatening situation. Negative moods also make people more distractable, and distractions can obviously lead to careless behaviors.

Selecting positive team members can contribute toward a positive work environ- ment because positive moods transmit from team member to team member. One study of 130 leaders and their followers found that leaders who are charismatic transfer their positive emotions to their followers through a contagion effect.134 It makes sense, then, to choose team members predisposed to positive moods.

Summary Emotions and moods are similar in that both are affective in nature. But they’re also different—moods are more general and less contextual than emotions. The time of day, stressful events, and sleep patterns are some of the factors that in- fluence emotions and moods. OB research on emotional labor, affective events theory, emotional intelligence, and emotion regulation helps us understand how people deal with emotions. Emotions and moods have proven relevant for virtually every OB topic we study, with implications for managerial practices.

Implications for Managers ●● Recognize that emotions are a natural part of the workplace and good

management does not mean creating an emotion-free environment. ●● To foster effective decision making, creativity, and motivation in employees,

model positive emotions and moods as much as is authentically possible. ●● Provide positive feedback to increase the positivity of employees. Of

course, it also helps to hire people who are predisposed to positive moods. ●● In the service sector, encourage positive displays of emotion, which make

customers feel more positive and thus improve customer service interac- tions and negotiations.

●● Understand the role of emotions and moods to significantly improve your ability to explain and predict your coworkers’ and others’ behavior.

126 PART 2 The Individual

sometimes Yelling is for everyone’s good

A nger is discussed throughout this chapter for a reason: It’s an important emotion. There are benefits to expressing an-ger. For one, research indicates that only employees who are committed to their organizations tend to express their anger, and gen- erally only to leaders who created the situation. This type of expres- sion of anger could lead to positive organizational change. Second, suppressed anger can lower job satisfaction and lead to a feeling of hopelessness that things will improve.

Even with these findings, we hear a lot about not responding emo- tionally to work challenges. Work cultures teach us to avoid showing any anger at all, lest we be seen as poor workers or, worse, unprofes- sional or even deviant or violent. While, of course, there are times when the expression of anger is harmful or unprofessional, we’ve taken this view so far that we now teach people to suppress perfectly normal emotions, and to ignore the effectiveness of some emotional expression.

Emerging research shows that suppressing anger takes a terrible internal toll on individuals. One Stanford University study found, for example, that when individuals were asked to wear a poker face during the showing of a movie clip depicting the atomic bombings of Japan during World War II, they were much more stressed in conversations after the video. Other research shows that college students who sup- press emotions like anger have more trouble making friends and are more likely to be depressed, and that employees who suppress anger feel more stressed by work.

For the good of organizations and their employees, we should en- courage people not to hold back their emotions, but to share them constructively.

POInt

Y es, anger is a common emotion. But it’s also a toxic one for the giver and the receiver. Angry outbursts can compromise the heart and contribute to diabetes, among other ill effects. The experience of another’s anger and its close correlate, hostility, is also linked to many counterproductive behaviors in organizations. The Bu- reau of labor Statistics estimates that 16 percent of fatal workplace injuries result from workplace violence. That is why many organizations have developed counteractive techniques—to blunt the harmful effects of anger in the workplace.

To reduce outcomes, many companies develop policies that govern conduct such as yelling, shouting profanities, and making hostile ges- tures. Others institute anger management programs. For example, one organization conducted mandatory in-house workshops that showed individuals how to deal with conflicts in the workplace before they boil over. The director who instituted the training said it “gave people spe- cific tools for opening a dialogue to work things out.” mTS Systems, a minnesota engineering firm, engages an outside consulting company to conduct anger management programs for its organization. Typically, mTS consultants hold an 8-hour seminar that discusses sources of anger, conflict resolution techniques, and organizational policies. This is followed by one-on-one sessions with individual employees that fo- cus on cognitive behavioral techniques to manage their anger. The outside trainer charges around $10,000 for the seminar and one-on- one sessions. The financial cost, though, is worth it for the emotional benefits the participants receive. “you want people to get better at communicating with each other,” says mTS manager Karen Borre.

In the end, everyone wins when organizations seek to diminish both the experience and the expression of anger at work. The work en- vironment becomes less threatening and stressful to employees and customers. Employees are likely to feel safer, and the angry employee is often helped as well.

COuntErPOInt

Sources: B. Carey, “The Benefits of Blowing your Top,” The New York Times, July 6, 2010, D1; r. y. Cheung and I. J. Park,“Anger Suppression, Interdependent Self-Construal, and Depression among Asian American and European American College Students,” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 16, no. 4 (2010): 517–25; D. Geddes and l. T. Stickney, “The Trouble with Sanctions: Organizational responses to Deviant Anger Displays at Work,” Human Relations 64, no. 2 (2011): 201–30; J. Fairley, “Taking Control of Anger management,” Workforce Management (October 2010): 10; l. T. Stickney and D. Geddes,“Positive, Proactive, and Committed: The Surprising Connection Between Good Citizens and Expressed (vs. Suppressed) Anger at Work,” Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 7, no. 4 (november 2014): 243–64; and J. Whalen, “Angry Outbursts really Do Hurt your Health, Doctors Find,” The Wall Street Journal, march 24, 2015, D1, D4.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 127

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

cHaPter revieW

QUestiOns FOr revieW 4-1 How are emotions different from moods? 4-2 What are the sources of emotions and moods? 4-3 What impact does emotional labor have on employees?

4-4 What is affective events theory?

4-5 What is emotional intelligence? 4-6 What are some strategies for emotion regulation? 4-7 How do you apply concepts about emotions and moods to specific OB issues?

etHicaL DiLeMMa Data Mining Emotions Did anyone ever tell you that you wear your heart on your sleeve? It’s a popular expression, but obviously no one is looking at your sleeve to read your emotions. Instead, we tend to study a person’s facial expressions to “read” their emotions. Most of us think we’re rather good at

reading faces, but we couldn’t say exactly how we make our interpretations, and we don’t know whether they are accurate. But what if we could use technology to know how another person is feeling? Would it be ethical to do so in the workplace and then act on our findings?

exPerientiaL exercise The Happiness Test Class members begin by taking out a piece of paper and recording the appropriate answer for themselves next to each of the words below.

Indicate to what extent you have felt this way during the past week, using a scale of 1 to 5 where:

1 = very slightly 2 = a little 3 = moderately 4 = quite a bit 5 = extremely or not at all

Items:

__interested __irritable __distressed __alert __excited

__ashamed __upset __inspired __strong __nervous

__guilty __determined __scared __attentive __hostile

__ jittery __enthusiastic __active __proud __afraid

Next, class members write two to three sentences about a memory of the time they were the happiest over the last year. Students should consider: What made you happy? What did the happiness feel like? What did the event make you think about? How long did the feeling of happiness last? Students may then take a few minutes to talk with oth- ers about their memories.

Turning over the paper with the happiness ratings, class members now rate themselves a second time on the items above, using the scale. When this is complete, the class is ready to discuss the following questions:

4-8. Looking over your initial ratings, how happy do your responses indicate you’ve been in the last week? Was this a usual week for you?

4-9. Comparing your two ratings, did the second set change? Did your ratings go up or down? Why do you think they would change?

4-10. The items in the rating represent the PANAS (Positive and Negative Affect Scale). The PANAS happiness scale has been shown to be a strong indi- cator of happiness. Do you think the test accurately measured your happiness? Why or why not?

128 PART 2 The Individual

Thankfully, technology is not quite ready to do this. Face reading is a complex science. Paul Eckman, a noted psychologist, may be the best human face reader in the world. He has been studying the interpretation of emotions for over 40 years and developed a catalog of over 5,000 mus- cle movements and their emotional content. His work even spawned a television series called Lie to Me, in which the main characters analyzed microexpressions—expressions that occur in the fraction of a second—to assist in corporate and governmental investigations. Using Eckman’s Facial Coding System, technology firms like Emotient Inc. have been developing algorithms to match microexpressions to emotions. These organizations are currently looking for patterns of microexpressions that might predict behavior.

Honda, P&G, Coca-Cola, and Unilever have tried the technology to identify the reactions to new products, with mixed results. For one thing, since expressions can change instantly, it is challenging to discern which emotions prevail. A person watching a commercial, for instance, may smile, furrow his brow, and raise his eyebrows all in the space of 30 seconds, indicating expressiveness, confusion, and sur- prise in turn. Second, it is difficult to know whether a person will act upon these fleeting emotions. Third, the technology might misinterpret the underlying emotions or their causes.

The potential applications of this technology to the work- place include surveillance, gauging reactions to organization announcements, and lie detection. Cameras could be in every meeting room, hallway, and even on employees’ com- puter screens. Emotion monitoring could be an announced event—say, every Monday from 8 to 9 a.m.—or random. Mon- itoring could be conducted with or without the knowledge of employees; for instance, data on the emotional reactions of every employee in an organizational announcement meeting could be read and interpreted through a camera on the wall.

So far, the most reliable workplace application seems to be using the technology to capture inconsistencies (ly- ing). Even the pioneer of facial emotion recognition, Ek- man, said, “I can’t control usage [of his technology]. I can only be certain that what I’m providing is at least an accu- rate depiction of when someone is concealing emotion.”

For each usage, there is an ethical consideration and a responsibility, particularly if a manager is going to act on the findings or infer the employee’s future behavior. The fact that the technology has not yet fully evolved for workplace application allows time for ethical guidelines to be developed. Foremost among the ethical concerns is privacy. “I can see few things more invasive than trying to record someone’s emotions in a database,” said privacy ad- vocate Ginger McCall. Concerns about ethical usage are also highly important if managers use the technology to make decisions about employees. For example, what if a manager learns from the software that an employee is un- happy and thus decides to look for a work reassignment for the employee, when actually the employee is unhappy about his spouse? Former U.S. counterterrorism detective Charles Lieberman advises, “Recognize [the technology’s] limitations—it can lead you in the right direction but is not definitive.”

Questions 4-11. What do you think are the best workplace applica-

tions for emotion reading technology? 4-12. What are the ethical implications of reading faces

for emotional content in the workplace? 4-13. Assuming you could become better at detecting

the real emotions of others from facial expres- sions, do you think it would help your career? Why or why not?

Sources: Paul Ekman profile, Being Human, http://www.beinghuman.org/mind/paul-ekman, accessed April 17, 2015; E. Dwoskin and E. M. Rusli, “The Technology That Unmasks Your Hidden Emotions,” The Wall Street Journal, January 29, 2015, B1, B8; and D. Matsumoto and H. S. Hwang, “Read- ing Facial Expressions of Emotion,” Psychological Science Agenda, May 2011, http://www.apa.org/ science/about/psa/2011/05/facial-expressions.aspx.

case inciDent 1 Crybabies As this chapter has shown, emotions are an inevitable part of people’s behavior at work. At the same time, people may not feel comfortable expressing all emotions at work. The reason might be that business culture and etiquette remain poorly suited to handling overt emotional displays. The question is: Can organizations become more intelli- gent about emotional management? Is it ever appropriate to yell, laugh, or cry at work?

Some people are skeptical about the virtues of emo- tional displays in the workplace. Emotions are automatic, physiological responses to the environment, and as such, they can be difficult to control appropriately. One 22-year- old customer service representative named Laura, who

was the subject of a case study, noted that fear and anger were routinely used as methods to control employees at her workplace, and the employees deeply resented this manipulation and wanted to act out. In another case, the chairman of a major television network made a practice of screaming at employees whenever anything went wrong, leading to hurt feelings and a lack of loyalty to the orga- nization. Like Laura, workers at this organization were hesitant to show their true reactions to these emotional outbursts for fear of being branded as “weak” or “inef- fectual.” Research indicated that while employees who could regulate their emotions would refrain from acting on their anger, employees who were low in self-regulation

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 129

and didn’t think the boss would do anything were likely to retaliate.

It might seem like these individuals worked in highly emotional workplaces, but in fact only a narrow range of emotions was deemed acceptable at work. Anger ap- pears to be more acceptable than sadness in many orga- nizations, despite the serious maladaptive consequences. Many people find their negative reaction to hearing an angry outburst lasts, making it difficult for them to con- centrate at work.

Organizations that recognize and work with emotions effectively may be more creative, satisfying, and produc- tive. For example, Laura noted that if she were able to express her hurt feelings without fear, she would have been much more satisfied with her work. In other words, the problem with Laura’s organization was not that emo- tions were displayed, but that emotional displays were handled poorly. Others note that the use of emotional knowledge—like the ability to read and understand the reactions of others—is crucial for workers, ranging from salespeople and customer service agents all the way to managers and executives. One survey even found that

88  percent of workers felt that being sensitive to the emotions of others is an asset. Management consultant Erika Anderson notes, “Crying at work is transformative and can open the door to change.” The question then is: Can organizations take specific steps to become better at allowing emotional displays without opening a Pandora’s box of outbursts?

Questions 4-14. Do you think the strategic use and display of emo-

tions serve to protect employees, or does covering your true emotions at work lead to more problems than it solves?

4-15. Have you ever worked where the free expression of emotion was part of the management style? Describe the advantages and disadvantages of this approach from your experience.

4-16. Research shows that the acts of coworkers (37 per- cent) and management (22 percent) cause more negative emotions for employees than do acts of customers (7 percent). What can Laura’s company do to change its emotional climate?

Sources: E. Bernstein, “Why People Have Big Explosions for Very Small Reasons,” The Wall Street Journal, October 16, 2012, D1, D2; A. Kreamer, “Go Ahead—Cry at Work,” Time, April 4, 2010, www.time.com; J. S. Lerner and K. Shonk, “How Anger Poisons Decision Making,” Harvard Business Review (September 2010): 26; H. Lian, D. J. Brown, D. L. Ferris, L. H. Liang, L. M. Keeping, and R. Morrison, “Abusive Supervision and Retaliation: A Self-Control Framework,” Academy of Manage- ment Journal 57, no. 1 (2014): 116–39; S. Shellenbarger, “When the Boss Is a Screamer,” The Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2012, D1–D2; and J. Perrone and M. H. Vickers, “Emotions as Strategic Game in a Hostile Workplace: An Exemplar Case,” Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 16, no. 3 (2004): 167–78.

case inciDent 2 Tall Poppy Syndrome “. . . the tall poppy syndrome, where the successful are cut down to the same size as everyone else, quick smart. You’re not supposed to stand out for intelligence, achievement, or, worst of all, wealth.” — Peter Hartcher

You may be wondering what poppies have to do with the workplace. It’s a reasonable question. The allegory behind tall poppy syndrome goes back centuries, but the emotions of envy and resentment toward strong performers—and the desire to “cut them down to size”—are timeless. So is the reality—evidence indicates that individuals whose performance and status rises above the rest (the tall pop- pies) sometimes find their careers are decapitated by jeal- ous coworkers (the shorter poppies) who undermine their efforts. Tall poppies are more likely to be victimized by group members, and group members are often pleased if a tall poppy is “brought down” by outsiders.

Tall poppy syndrome seems to be motivated by the observer’s personality traits, emotions, and perception of justice. When individuals believe the high achiever is

undeserving of his or her status, or conversely when indi- viduals believe they deserve a higher status than they’ve been given (called relative deprivation), resentment and envy are heightened. The degree of tall poppy syndrome also seems to relate to the traits of the people who judge their coworkers. People who have lower self-esteem and who do not value power and achievement tend to think high performers are undeserving and should fall. Final- ly, the general likability of the achiever seems to influ- ence the emotions of observers. If achievers are popular, part of the in-group, work hard, and exhibit high moral character, observers are less likely to feel resentful and wish them ill.

Tall poppy syndrome may be universal, but there are cultural differences. Research has shown that in collec- tivistic societies like Japan, students in a study were more inclined to cut down a high performer because they resented distinguishing one person more than the rest of the group. In contrast, students from the individualistic

130 PART 2 The Individual

United States were more likely to reward high achievers than were Australian students because the Americans did not feel the same degree of envy.

To the extent that it cuts down those with legitimate achievements, there is nothing good about tall poppy syndrome when high performers are victimized and work performance is limited to a common denominator. Both the high performer and the organization can employ some countermeasures aimed at lessening the emotional reactions of observers. For one, high performers can dem- onstrate humbleness and humility. This may allow them to boost the performance of coworkers, who then no lon- ger feel resentful of their success. Second, managers can

increase work group identity for the coworkers, so they see the success of one individual as the success of the group, rather than as an injustice.

Questions 4-17. Have you observed tall poppy syndrome in your

workplace or school? Which traits seemed to bother the observers the most?

4-18. In what specific ways do you think high performers can mitigate feelings of envy and resentment? Give examples.

4-19. In what ways do you think managers can foster a group attitude toward success?

Sources: P. Hartcher, “Voters Now at Ease with Rich Pickings,” The Sydney Morning Herald ( July 30, 2013), http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/voters-now-at-ease-with-rich- pickings-20130729-2quvp.html; N. T. Feather, “Analyzing Relative Deprivation in Relation to Deservingness, Entitlement and Resentment,” Social Justice Research 28 (2015): 7–26; E. Kim and T. M. Glomb, “Victimization of High Performers: The Roles of Envy and Work Group Identifica- tion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 4 (2014): 619–34; and K. Van Valkenburgh, Investigating Tall Poppy Syndrome in United States Financial Institutions: An Attitude and Values Perspective, doctoral dissertation, Alliant International University (2013), publication number 3595388.

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

4-20. In relation to the Ethical Dilemma, in what scenarios would you agree to having your emotions read and interpreted by your organization?

4-21. Concerning Case Incident 2, have you ever been a tall poppy? If so, what reactions from others did you get, and were there consequences for you? If not, why not?

4-22. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

1S. G. Barsade and D. E. Gibson, “Why Does Affect Matter in Organizations?” Academy of Management Perspectives February, 2007, 36–59. 2emotion. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dic- tionary, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/ us/definition/american_english/emotion, retrieved July 31, 2015. 3mood. The American Heritage Medical Diction- ary (2007), retrieved April 27, 2015 from http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary .com/mood. 4mood. Farlex Partner Medical Dictionary (2012), retrieved April 27, 2015, from http://medical- dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/mood. 5See, for example, J. L. Tracy and R. W. Robins, “Emerging Insights into the Nature and Function of Pride,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 16, no. 3 (2007): 147–50. 6R. C. Solomon, “Back to Basics: On the Very Idea of ‘Basic Emotions,’” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 32, no. 2 (June 2002): 115–44. 7P. Ekman, Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Communication and

enDnOtes Emotional Life (New York: Times Books/Henry Holt and Co., 2003). 8M. Gendron, D. Roberson, J. M. van der Vyver, and L. F. Barrett, “Cultural Relativity of Perceiving Emotion from Vocalizations,” Psychological Science 25, no. 4 (2014): 911–20. 9See, for instance, J. Wegge, R. van Dick, G. K. Fisher, et al., “A Test of Basic Assumptions of Affective Events Theory (AET) In Call Center Work,” British Journal of Management 17, no. 3 (2006): 237–254; and H. M. Weiss and D. J. Beal, “Reflections on Affective Events Theory,” in N. M. Ashkanasy, W. J. Zerbe, and C. E. J. Hartel (Eds.), Effect of Affect in Organizational Settings, 2005, 1–21. 10P. S. Russell and R. Giner-Sorolla, “Bodily Moral Disgust: What It Is, How It Is Different from Anger, and Why It Is an Unreasoned Emotion,” Psychological Bulletin 139, no. 2 (2013): 328–51. 11H. A. Chapman and A. K. Anderson, “Things Rank and Gross in Nature: A Review

and Synthesis of Moral Disgust,” Psychological Bulletin 139, no. 2 (2013): 300–27. 12T. Krennenauer, J. B. Asendorpf, and G. Nunner-Winkler, “Moral Emotion Attributions and Personality Traits As Long-Term Predic- tors of Antisocial Conduct in Early Adulthood: Findings from a 20-Year Longitudinal Study,” International Journal of Behavioral Development, May 2013, 192–201. 13A. Ben-Ze’ev, The Subtlety of Emotions ( Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000), 94. 14T. A. Ito and J. T. Cacioppo, “Varia- tions on a Human Universal: Individual Differences in Positivity Offset and Negativity Bias,” Cognition and Emotion 19, no. 1 (2005): 1–26. 15D. Holman, “Call Centres,” in D. Hol- man, T. D. Wall, C. Clegg, P. Sparrow, and A. Howard (eds.), The Essentials of the New Work Place: A Guide to the Human Impact of Modern Working Practices (Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2005), 111–32. 16Ben-Ze’ev, The Subtlety of Emotions.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 131

17S. D. Pressman, M. W. Gallagher, S. J. Lopez, and B. Campos, “Incorporating Culture Into the Study of Affect and Health,” Psychological Science 25, no. 12 (2014): 2281–83. 18K. B. Curhan, T. Simms, H. R. Markus, . . . C. D. Ryff, “Just How Bad Negative Affect Is for Your Health Depends on Culture,” Psychologi- cal Science 25, no. 12 (2014): 2277–80. 19O. Burkeman, “The Power of Negative Think- ing,” The New York Times, August 5, 2012, 9. 20E. Jaffe, “Positively Negative,” Association for Psychological Science, November 2012, 13–17. 21D. Xanthopoulou, A. B. Bakker, E. Demer- outi, and W. B. Schaufeli, “A Diary Study on the Happy Worker: How Job Resources Relate to Positive Emotions and Personal Resources,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 21, no. 4 (2012): 489–517. 22J. R. Spence, D. J. Brown, L. M. Keep- ing, and H. Lian, “ Helpful Today, but Not Tomorrow? Feeling Grateful as a Predictor of Daily Organizational Citizenship Behaviors,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 705–38. 23E. Bernstein, “Feeling Awesome: Studies Find an Emotion Has Myriad Benefits,” The Wall Street Journal, February 24, 2015, D3. 24L. M. Poverny and S. Picascia, “There Is No Crying in Business,” Womensmedia.com, October 20, 2009, www.womensmedia.com/ new/Crying-at-Work.shtml. 25M.-A. Reinhard and N. Schwartz, “The Influ- ence of Affective States on the Process of Lie Detection,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 18 (2012): 377–89. 26K. D. McCaul and A. B. Mullens, “Affect, Thought and Self-Protective Health Behavior: The Case of Worry and Cancer Screening.” In J. Suls and K. A. Wallston (eds.), Social Psychological Foundations of Health and Illness (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2003): 161. 27J. Haidt, “The New Synthesis in Moral Psychology,” Science 316 (May 18, 2007): 998, 1002; I. E. de Hooge, R. M. A. Nelissen, S. M. Breugelmans, and M. Zeelenberg, “What Is Moral about Guilt? Acting ‘Prosocially’ at the Disadvantage of Others,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100 (2011): 462–73; and C. A. Hutcherson and J. J. Gross, “The Moral Emotions: A Social-Functionalist Account of Anger, Disgust, and Contempt,” Journal of Per- sonality and Social Psychology 100 (2011): 719–37. 28T. Jacobs, “My Morals Are Better Than Yours,” Miller-McCune.com, March/April 2012, 68–69. 29A. Gopnik, “Even Children Get More Outraged at ‘Them’ and ‘Us’,” The Wall Street Journal, August 30–31, 2014, C2. 30N. Angier, “Spite Is Good. Spite Works,” The Wall Street Journal, April 1, 2014, D1, D3. 31D. C. Rubin, R. M. Hoyle, and M. R. Leary, “Differential Predictability of Four Dimen- sions of Affect Intensity,” Cognition and Emotion 26 (2012): 25–41. 32D. Watson, Mood and Temperament (New York: Guilford Press, 2000). 33B. P. Hasler, M. S. Mehl, R. R. Bootzin, and S. Vazire, “ Preliminary Evidence of Diurnal

Rhythms in Everyday Behaviors Associated with Positive Affect,” Journal of Research in Personality 42 (2008): 1537–46. 34Watson, Mood and Temperament. 35A. A. Stone, J. E. Schwartz, D. Schkade, N. Schwarz, A. Krueger, and D. Kahneman, “A Population Approach to the Study of Emotion: Diurnal Rhythms of a Working Day Examined with the Day Reconstruction Method,” Emotion 6 (2006): 139–49. 36S. A. Golder and M. W. Macy, “Diurnal and Seasonal Mood Vary with Work, Sleep, and Daylength across Diverse Cultures,” Science 333, (2011): 1878–81. 37G. D. Block, “Fixes for Our Out-of Sync Body Clocks,” The Wall Street Journal, August 16–17, 2014, C3. 38S. A. Golder and M. W. Macy, “Diurnal and Seasonal Mood Vary with Work, Sleep, and Daylength across Diverse Cultures.” 39J. J. A. Denissen, L. Butalid, L. Penke, and M. A. G. van Aken, “The Effects of Weather on Daily Mood: A Multilevel Approach,” Emo- tion 8, no. 5 (2008): 662–67; M. C. Keller, B. L. Fredrickson, O. Ybarra, S. Côté, K. John- son, J. Mikels, A. Conway, and T. Wagner, “A Warm Heart and a Clear Head: The Contin- gent Effects of Weather on Mood and Cogni- tion,” Psychological Science 16 (2005): 724–31; and Watson, Mood and Temperament. 40Watson, Mood and Temperament, 100. 41J. J. Lee, F. Gino, and B. R. Staats, “Rainmak- ers: Why Bad Weather Means Good Produc- tivity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 3 (2014): 504–13. 42J. A. Fuller, J. M. Stanton, G. G. Fisher, C. Spitzmüller, S. S. Russell, and P. C. Smith, “A Lengthy Look at the Daily Grind: Time Series Analysis of Events, Mood, Stress, and Satisfac- tion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 6 (December 2003): 1019–33. 43G. Schaffer, “What’s Good, When, and Why?” Association for Psychological Science, No- vember 2012, 27–29. 44A. M. Isen, “Positive Affect as a Source of Human Strength,” in L. G. Aspinwall and U. Staudinger (eds.), The Psychology of Human Strengths (Washington, DC: American Psycho- logical Association, 2003), 179–95. 45Watson, Mood and Temperament. 46Sleep in America Poll (Washington, DC: National Sleep Foundation, 2005), www .kintera.org/atf/cf/%7Bf6bf2668-a1b4-4fe8- 8d1a-a5d39340d9cb%7D/2005_summary_of_ findings.pdf. 47D. Meinert, “Sleepless in Seattle . . . and Cin- cinnati and Syracuse,” HR Magazine, October 2012, 55–57. 48E. Bernstein, “Changing the Clocks Wasn’t Good for Your Relationships,” The Wall Street Journal, March 10, 2015, D1, D2. 49B. A. Scott and T. A. Judge, “Insomnia, Emo- tions, and Job Satisfaction: A Multilevel Study,” Journal of Management 32, no. 5 (2006): 622–45. 50E. Bernstein, “Changing the Clocks Wasn’t Good for Your Relationships.”

51B. Arends, “To Sleep, Perchance to Earn,” The Wall Street Journal, September 20–21, 2014, B8. 52S. Reddy, “Husband and Wife Scientists Troll Genetics for Clues to Restful Shut Eye for All,” The Wall Street Journal, June 10, 2014, D1, D2. 53P. R. Giacobbi, H. A. Hausenblas, and N. Frye, “A Naturalistic Assessment of the Rela- tionship between Personality, Daily Life Events, Leisure-Time Exercise, and Mood,” Psychology of Sport & Exercise 6, no. 1 (January 2005): 67–81. 54L. L. Carstensen, M. Pasupathi, M. Ulrich, and J. R. Nesselroade, “Emotional Experience in Everyday Life across the Adult Life Span,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79, no. 4 (2000): 644–55. 55M. G. Gard and A. M. Kring, “Sex Differenc- es in the Time Course of Emotion,” Emotion 7, no. 2 (2007): 429–37; and M. Jakupcak, K. Salters, K. L. Gratz, and L. Roemer, “Mascu- linity and Emotionality: An Investigation of Men’s Primary and Secondary Emotional Responding,” Sex Roles 49 (2003): 111–20. 56A. H. Fischer, P. M. Rodriguez Mosquera, A. E. M. van Vianen, and A. S. R. Manstead, “Gender and Culture Differences in Emo- tion,” Emotion 4 (2004): 84–87. 57L. F. Barrett and E. Bliss-Moreau, “She’s Emotional. He’s Having a Bad Day: Attribu- tional Explanations for Emotion Stereotypes,” Emotion 9 (2009): 649–58. 58D. V. Becker, D. T. Kenrick, S. L. Neuberg, K. C. Blackwell, and D. M. Smith, “The Confounded Nature of Angry Men and Happy Women,” Journal of Personality and Social Psy- chology 92 (2007): 179–90. 59M. W. Kramer and J. A. Hess, “Communica- tion Rules for the Display of Emotions in Or- ganizational Settings,” Management Communi- cation Quarterly August 2002, 66–80; and J. M. Diefendorff and E. M. Richard, “Antecedents and Consequences of Emotional Display Rule Perceptions,” Journal of Applied Psychology April 2003, 284–94. 60J. M. Diefendorff and G. J. Greguras, “Con- textualizing Emotional Display Rules: Examin- ing the Roles of Targets and Discrete Emo- tions in Shaping Display Rule Perceptions,” Journal of Management 35 (2009): 880–98. 61P. S. Christoforou and B. E. Ashforth, “Revis- iting the Debate on the Relationships between Display Rules and Performance: Considering the Explicitness of Display Rules,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 249–61. 62J. D. Kammeyer-Mueller, A. L. Rubenstein, D. M. Long, M. A. Odio, B. R. Buckman, Y. Zhang, and M. D. K. Halvorsen-Ganepola, “A Meta-Analytic Structural Model of Dispo- sitionally Affectivity and Emotional Labor,” Personnel Psychology 66 (2013): 47–90. 63D. T. Wagner, C. M. Barnes, and B. A. Scott, “Driving It Home: How Workplace Emotional Labor Harms Employee Home Life,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 487–516. 64J. D. Kammeyer-Mueller, A. L. Rubenstein, D. M. Long, M. A. Odio, B. R. Buckman, Y. Zhang, and M. D. K. Halvorsen-Ganepola,

132 PART 2 The Individual

“A Meta-Analytic Structural Model of Disposi- tionally Affectivity and Emotional Labor.” 65 A. A. Grandey, “When ‘The Show Must Go On,’” Academy of Management Journal 46 (2003): 86–96. 66U. R. Hulsheger, H. J. E. Alberts, A. Fein- holdt, and J. W. B. Lang, “Benefits of Mindful- ness at Work: The Role of Mindfulness in Emotion Regulation, Emotional Exhaustion, and Job Satisfaction,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 98, no. 2 (2013): 310–25. 67J. P. Trougakos, D. J. Beal, S. G. Green, and H. M. Weiss, “Making the Break Count: An Episodic Examination of Recovery Activities, Emotional Experiences, and Positive Affective Displays,” Academy of Management Journal 51 (2008): 131–46. 68K. L. Wang and M. Groth, “Buffering the Negative Effects of Employee Surface Acting: The Moderating Role of Employee-Customer Relationship Strength and Personalized Services,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 2 (2014): 341–50. 69H. Guenter, I. J. H. van Emmerik, and B. Schreurs, “The Negative Effects of Delays in Information Exchange: Looking at Workplace Relationships from an Affective Events Perspec- tive,” Human Resource Management Review 24, no. 4 (December 2014): 283–98; and F. K. Matta, H. T. Erol-Korkmaz, R. E. Johnson, and P. Biçaksiz, “Significant Work Events and Counterproduc- tive Work Behavior: The Role of Fairness, Emotions, and Emotion Regulation,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 35, no. 7 (2014): 920–44. 70C. D. Fisher, A. Minbashian, N. Beckmann, and R. E. Wood, “Task Appraisals, Emotions, and Performance Goal Orientations,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98, no. 2 (2013): 364–73. 71N. M. Ashkanasy, C. E. J. Hartel, and C. S. Daus, “Diversity and Emotion: The New Fron- tiers in Organizational Behavior Research,” Journal of Management 28, no. 3 (2002): 324. 72T. Upshur-Lupberger, “Watch Your Mood: A Leadership Lesson,” The Huffington Post, April 22, 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ terrie-upshurlupberger/watch-your-mood- a-leaders_b_7108648.html. 73D. R. Caruso, J. D. Mayer, and P. Salovey, “Emotional Intelligence and Emotional Leadership,” in R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, and F. J. Pirozzolo (eds.), Multiple Intelligences and Leadership (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erl- baum, 2002), 70; O. J. Sheldon, D. Dunning, and D. R. Ames, “Emotionally Unskilled, Unaware, and Uninterested in Learning More: Reactions to Feedback about Deficits in Emotional Intelligence,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 1 (2014): 125–37. 74P. Salovey and D. Grewal, “The Science of Emotional Intelligence,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 14, no. 6 (2005): 281–85; and D. Geddes and R. R. Callister, “Crossing the Line(s): A Dual Threshold Model of An- ger in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review 32, no. 3 (2007): 721–46. 75R. Gilkey, R. Caceda, and C. Kilts, “When

Emotional Reasoning Trumps IQ,” Harvard Business Review, September 2010, 27. 76M. Seo and L. F. Barrett, “Being Emotional During Decision Making—Good or Bad? An Empirical Investigation,” Academy of Manage- ment Journal 50, no. 4 (2007): 923–40. 77F. I. Greenstein, The Presidential Difference: Leadership Style from FDR to Clinton (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001). 78S. L. Koole, “The Psychology of Emotion Reg- ulation: An Integrative Review,” Cognition and Emotion 23 (2009): 4–41; H. A. Wadlinger and D. M. Isaacowitz, “Fixing Our Focus: Training Attention to Regulate Emotion,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 15 (2011): 75–102. 79D. H. Kluemper, T. DeGroot, and S. Choi, “Emotion Management Ability: Predicting Task Performance, Citizenship, and Devi- ance,” Journal of Management, May 2013, 878–905. 80J. V. Wood, S. A. Heimpel, L. A. Manwell, and E. J. Whittington, “This Mood Is Familiar and I Don’t Deserve to Feel Better Anyway: Mecha- nisms Underlying Self-Esteem Differences in Motivation to Repair Sad Moods,” Journal of Per- sonality and Social Psychology 96 (2009): 363–80. 81E. Kim, D. P. Bhave, and T. M. Glomb, “Emotion Regulation in Workgroups: The Roles of Demographic Diversity and Rela- tional Work Context,” Personnel Psychology, Autumn 2013, 613–44. 82Ibid. 83S. L. Koole, “The Psychology of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review,” Cognition and Emotion 23 (2009): 4–41. 84L. K. Barber, P. G. Bagsby, and D. C. Munz, “Affect Regulation Strategies for Promot- ing (or Preventing) Flourishing Emotional Health,” Personality and Individual Differences 49 (2010): 663–66. 85J. P. Trougakos, D. J. Beal, B. H. Cheng, I. Hideg, and D. Zweig, “Too Drained to Help: A Resource Depletion Perspective on Daily Interpersonal Citizenship Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 227–36. 86B. A. Scott, C. M. Barnes, and D. T. Wagner, “Chameleonic or Consistent? A Multilevel Investigation of Emotional Labor Variability and Self-Monitoring,” Academy of Management Journal 55, no. 4 (2012): 905–26. 87U. R. Hülsheger, J. W. B. Lang, A. F. Schewe, and F. R. H. Zijlstra, “When Regulating Emotions at Work Pays Off: A Diary and an Intervention Study on Emotion Regulation and Customer Tips in Service Jobs,” Journal of Applied Psychology, March 2015, 263–77. 88J. L. Jooa and G. Francesca, “Poker-Faced Morality: Concealing Emotions Leads to Utilitarian Decision Making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 126 (January 2015): 49–64. 89Ibid. 90T. L. Webb, E. Miles, and P. Sheeran, “Dealing with Feeling: A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Strategies Derived from the Process Model of Emotion Regulation,” Psycho-

logical Bulletin 138, no. 4 (2012): 775–808; S. Srivastava, M. Tamir, K. M. McGonigal, O. P. John, and J. J. Gross, “The Social Costs of Emotional Suppression: A Prospective Study of the Transition to College,” Journal of Person- ality and Social Psychology 96 (2009): 883–97; Y. Liu, L. M. Prati, P. L. Perrewé, and R. A. Brymer, “Individual Differences in Emotion Regulation, Emotional Experiences at Work, and Work-Related Outcomes: A Two-Study In- vestigation,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 40 (2010): 1515–38; and H. A. Wadlinger and D. M. Isaacowitz, “Fixing our Focus: Training Attention to Regulate Emotion,” Personality and Social Psychology Review 15 (2011): 75–102. 91J. J. Gross, E. Halperin, and R. Porat, “Emo- tion Regulation in Intractable Conflicts,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 22, no. 6 (2013): 423–29. 92A. S. Troy, A. J. Shallcross, and I. B. Mauss, “A Person-by-Person Situation Approach to Emotion Regulation: Cognitive Reappraisal Can Either Help or Hurt, Depending on the Context,” Psychological Science 24, no. 12 (2013): 2505–14. 93E. Halperin, R. Porat, M. Tamir, and J. J. Gross, “Can Emotion Regulation Change Political Attitudes in Intractable Conflicts? From the Laboratory to the Field,” Psychologi- cal Science, January 2013, 106–11. 94R. Teper, Z. V. Segal, and M. Inzlicht, “Inside the Mindful Mind: How Mindfulness Enhances Emotion Regulation through Improvements in Executive Control,” Current Directions in Psycho- logical Science 22, no. 6 (2013): 449–54. 95A. S. McCance, C. D. Nye, L. Wang, K. S. Jones, and C. Chiu, “Alleviating the Burden of Emotional Labor: The Role of Social Sharing,” Journal of Management 39, no. 2 (2013): 392–415. 96F. Nils and B. Rimé, “Beyond the Myth of Venting: Social Sharing Modes Determine the Benefits of Emotional Disclosure,” European Journal of Social Psychology 42 (2012): 672–81; and J. D. Parlamis, “Venting as Emotion Regu- lation: The Influence of Venting Responses and Respondent Identity on Anger and Emo- tional Tone,” International Journal of Conflict Management 23 (2012): 77–96. 97S.-C. S. Chi and S.-G. Liang, “When Do Subordinates’ Emotion-Regulation Strategies Matter? Abusive Supervision, Subordinates’ Emotional Exhaustion, and Work Withdrawal,” Leadership Quarterly, February 2013, 125–37. 98R. H. Humphrey, “How Do Leaders Use Emotional Labor?” Journal of Organizational Behavior July 2012, 740–44. 99A. M. Grant, “Rocking the Boat but Keeping It Steady: The Role of Emotion Regulation in Employee Voice,” Academy of Management Journal 56, no. 6 (2013): 1703–23. 100S. Reddy, “Walk This Way: Acting Happy Can Make It So,” The Wall Street Journal, November 18, 2014, D3. 101See A. M. Isen, “Positive Affect and Deci- sion Making,” in M. Lewis and J. M. Haviland- Jones (eds.), Handbook of Emotions, 2nd ed.

Emotions and Moods CHAPTER 4 133

(New York: Guilford, 2000), 261–77. 102N. Nunez, K. Schweitzer, C. A. Chai, and B. Myers, “ Negative Emotions Felt During Trial: The Effect of Fear, Anger, and Sadness on Juror Decision Making,” Applied Cognitive Psychology 29, no. 2 (2015): 200–9. 103S. N. Mohanty and D. Suar, “Decision Mak- ing Under Uncertainty and Information Pro- cessing in Positive and Negative Mood States,” Psychological Reports 115, no. 1 (2014): 91–105. 104S.-C. Chuang and H.-M. Lin, “The Effect of Induced Positive and Negative Emotion and Openness-to-Feeling in Student’s Consumer Decision Making,” Journal of Business and Psychology 22, no. 1 (2007): 65–78. 105D. van Knippenberg, H. J. M. Kooij-de Bode, and W. P. van Ginkel, “The Interactive Effects of Mood and Trait Negative Affect in Group Decision Making,” Organization Science 21, no. 3 (2010): 731–44. 106S. Lyubomirsky, L. King, and E. Diener, “The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Hap- piness Lead to Success?” Psychological Bulletin 131, no. 6 (2005): 803–55; and M. Baas, C. K. W. De Dreu, and B. A. Nijstad, “A Meta-Analysis of 25 Years of Mood-Creativity Research: He- donic Tone, Activation, or Regulatory Focus,” Psychological Bulletin 134 (2008): 779–806. 107M. J. Grawitch, D. C. Munz, and E. K. Elliott, “Promoting Creativity in Temporary Problem-Solving Groups: The Effects of Posi- tive Mood and Autonomy in Problem Defini- tion on Idea-Generating Performance,” Group Dynamics 7, no. 3 ( September 2003): 200–13. 108S. Lyubomirsky, L. King, and E. Diener, “The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success?” Psychologi- cal Bulletin 131, no. 6 (2005): 803–55. 109N. Madjar, G. R. Oldham, and M. G. Pratt, “There’s No Place Like Home? The Contribu- tions of Work and Nonwork Creativity Support to Employees’ Creative Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 45, no. 4 (2002): 757–67. 110J. M. George and J. Zhou, “Understanding When Bad Moods Foster Creativity and Good Ones Don’t: The Role of Context and Clarity of Feelings,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no. 4 (August 2002): 687–97; and J. P. Forgas and J. M. George, “Affective Influences on Judgments and Behavior in Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective,” Organiza- tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes 86, no. 1 (2001): 3–34. 111C. K. W. De Dreu, M. Baas, and B. A. Nijstad, “Hedonic Tone and Activation Level in the Mood-Creativity Link: Toward a Dual Pathway to Creativity Model,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94, no. 5 (2008): 739–56; J. M. George and J. Zhou, “Dual Tuning in a Sup- portive Context: Joint Contributions of Positive Mood, Negative Mood, and Supervisory Behaviors to Employee Creativity,” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 3 (2007): 605–22. 112M. B. Wieth and R. T. Zacks, “Time of Day Effects on Problem Solving: When the Non- optimal Is Optimal,” Thinking & Reasoning 17

(2011): 387–401. 113A. Erez and A. M. Isen, “The Influence of Positive Affect on the Components of Expec- tancy Motivation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no. 6 (2002): 1055–67. 114W. Tsai, C.-C. Chen, and H. Liu, “Test of a Model Linking Employee Positive Moods and Task Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 92, no. 6 (2007): 1570–83. 115R. Ilies and T. A. Judge, “Goal Regulation across Time: The Effect of Feedback and Affect,” Journal of Applied Psychology 90, no. 3 (May 2005): 453–67. 116J. E. Bono, H. J. Foldes, G. Vinson, and J. P. Muros, “ Workplace Emotions: The Role of Su- pervision and Leadership,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 5 (2007): 1357–67. 117S. G. Liang and S.-C. S. Chi, “Transforma- tional Leadership and Follower Task Perfor- mance: The Role of Susceptibility to Positive Emotions and Follower Positive Emotions,” Journal of Business and Psychology, March 2013, 17–29. 118V. A. Visser, D. van Knippenberg, G. van Kleef, and B. Wisse, “How Leader Displays of Happiness and Sadness Influence Follower Performance: Emotional Contagion and Creative versus Analytical Performance,” Leadership Quarterly, February 2013, 172–88. 119G. A. Van Kleef, C. K. W. De Dreu, and A. S. R. Manstead, “The Interpersonal Effects of Emotions in Negotiations: A Motivated Information Processing Approach,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87, no. 4 (2004): 510–28; and G. A. Van Kleef, C. K. W. De Dreu, and A. S. R. Manstead, “The Inter- personal Effects of Anger and Happiness in Negotiations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86, no. 1 (2004): 57–76. 120E. van Dijk, G. A. Van Kleef, W. Steinel, and I. van Beest, “A Social Functional Ap- proach to Emotions in Bargaining: When Communicating Anger Pays and When It Backfires,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94, no. 4 (2008): 600–14. 121K. M. O’Connor and J. A. Arnold, “Dis- tributive Spirals: Negotiation Impasses and the Moderating Role of Disputant Self-Efficacy,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 84, no. 1 (2001): 148–76. 122B. Shiv, G. Loewenstein, A. Bechara, H. Damasio, and A. R. Damasio, “Investment Behavior and the Negative Side of Emotion,” Psychological Science 16, no. 6 (2005): 435–39. 123W.-C. Tsai and Y.-M. Huang, “Mechanisms Linking Employee Affective Delivery and Customer Behavioral Intentions,” Journal of Applied Psychology, October 2002, 1001–08. 124See P. B. Barker and A. A. Grandey, “Ser- vice with a Smile and Encounter Satisfaction: Emotional Contagion and Appraisal Mecha- nisms,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 6 (2006): 1229–38; and S. D. Pugh, “Service with a Smile: Emotional Contagion in the Service Encounter,” Academy of Management Journal, October 2001, 1018–27.

125D. E. Rupp and S. Spencer, “When Custom- ers Lash Out: The Effects of Customer Inter- actional Injustice on Emotional Labor and the Mediating Role of Emotions, Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 4 (2006): 971–78; and Tsai and Huang, “Mechanisms Linking Employee Affective Delivery and Customer Behavioral Intentions.” 126R. Ilies and T. A. Judge, “Understanding the Dynamic Relationships among Personality, Mood, and Job Satisfaction: A Field Experience Sampling Study,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 89 (2002): 1119–39. 127T. A. Judge and R. Ilies, “Affect and Job Satisfaction: A Study of Their Relationship at Work and at Home,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 89 (2004): 661–73. 128Z. Song, M. Foo, and M. A. Uy, “Mood Spillover and Crossover among Dual-Earner Couples: A Cell Phone Event Sampling Study,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 2 (2008): 443–52. 129See R. J. Bennett and S. L. Robinson, “ Development of a Measure of Workplace Deviance,” Journal of Applied Psychology, June 2000, 349–60; see also P. R. Sackett and C. J. DeVore, “Counterproductive Behaviors at Work,” in N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, and C. Viswesvaran (eds.), Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology, vol. 1 (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001), 145–64. 130K. Lee and N. J. Allen, “Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Workplace Devi- ance: The Role of Affect and Cognition,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no 1 (2002): 131–42; T. A. Judge, B. A. Scott, and R. Ilies, “Hostility, Job Attitudes, and Workplace Devi- ance: Test of a Multilevel Mode,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 1 (2006): 126–38; and S. Kaplan, J. C. Bradley, J. N. Luchman, and D. Haynes, “On the Role of Positive and Negative Affectivity in Job Performance: A Meta-Analytic Investigation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 1 (2009): 152–76. 131S. C. Douglas, C. Kiewitz, M. Martinko, P. Harvey, Y. Kim, and J. U. Chun, “Cognitions, Emotions, and Evaluations: An Elaboration Likelihood Model for Workplace Aggres- sion,” Academy of Management Review 33, no. 2 (2008): 425–51. 132A. K Khan, S. Ouratulain, and J. R. Craw- shaw, “The Mediating Role of Discrete Emo- tions in the Relationship between Injustice and Counterproductive Work Behaviors: A Study in Pakistan,” Journal of Business and Psychology, March 2013, 49–61. 133Kaplan, Bradley, Luchman, and Haynes, “On the Role of Positive and Negative Affectiv- ity in Job Performance: A Meta-Analytic Inves- tigation”; and J. Maiti, “Design for Worksystem Safety Using Employees’ Perception about Safety,” Work—A Journal of Prevention Assess- ment & Rehabilitation 41 (2012): 3117–22. 134J. E. Bono and R. Ilies, “Charisma, Positive Emotions and Mood Contagion,” The Leader- ship Quarterly 17, no. 4 (2006): 317–34.

S ou

rc e:

P et

er F

ol ey

/B lo

om be

rg /G

et ty

Im ag

es

Personality and  Values5

134

SecretS of a SucceSSful entrepreneur

How does someone become a successful entrepreneur? Some say it’s a process of elimination—when people find through trial and error that there is no job that fits them, they create their own; and the more trial

and error, the more likely the person will become successful.

Others say success comes from a lengthy process of nurtur-

ing and mentoring. Still others say it’s about having the right stuff—the right personality.

CEO Mark Josephson (shown here) of Bitly, the leading Web

link shortening service, would say his success is from all the

above: personality, nurturing/mentoring, and experience. First,

his entrepreneurial tendencies were apparent from an early

age. “I’m competitive, and I want to win. I want us to do more,

and I want to push. I find that if you don’t ask for more, you’re

never going to get it.” Second, Josephson was nurtured by his

father, a successful entrepreneur. “I learned from watching him

that you’re always working as an entrepreneur. My dad always

told us that it doesn’t matter who you work for and who signs your check; you work for yourself. That resonated with me.”

Third, Josephson learned from personal experience. After holding a num-

ber of different jobs, a coach asked him what was most satisfying. He real-

ized, “I was the happiest and most successful and most fulfilled when I was

building a team and selling the vision and the passion and the dream. And

5-1 Describe personality, the way it is measured, and the factors that shape it.

5-2 Describe the strengths and weaknesses of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) personality framework and the Big Five model.

5-3 Discuss how the concepts of core self-evaluation (CSE), self-monitoring, and proactive personality contribute to the understanding of personality.

5-4 Describe how the situation affects whether personality predicts behavior.

5-5 Contrast terminal and instrumental values.

5-6 Describe the differences between person–job fit and person–organization fit.

5-7 Compare Hofstede’s five value dimensions and the GLOBE framework.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

136 PART 2 The Individual

I love growing a business and succeeding as a team. Seeing your numbers

go up is just incredibly addicting.”

Research has found that experience, mentoring, and local social envi-

ronmental factors can support entrepreneurial tendencies. However, the

strongest case can be made for an entrepreneurial personality type. For

example, one large study in the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United

States indicated entrepreneurs can be categorized by high extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness, and low agreeableness and neuroticism.

Another study of female entrepreneurs in Malaysia suggested individuals

who rated high on a need to achieve, self-empowerment, and risk-taking are

more likely to be successful. Further research in Germany, the Czech Re-

public, Italy, and Switzerland suggested creative individuals who are adept

at overcoming obstacles are more successful at entrepreneurial innovation.

Entrepreneurs also have a confident personality. Winston Churchill once

said, “Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss

of enthusiasm.” Josephson has the personality, nurturing, and experience to succeed. He

offers this advice to others who want to capitalize on their entrepreneurial

personalities: “In your 20s, work harder than anybody else and put yourself

in a position where you’re close to the business. Find a mentor within a

smaller company, where you can learn the business and work really hard

and where your growth is capped only by how good you are and how hard

you work.” Of course, the most important thing is to discover for yourself, as did Josephson, whether you have the personality of an entrepreneur.

While a recent survey revealed that two-thirds of individuals across 38 na-

tions believed entrepreneurs are made, not born, research—and profiles of

entrepreneurs like Mark Josephson—suggest there’s more to it.

Sources: Bitly.com official website; A. Bryant, “Mark Josephson of Bitly, on Leading with a Compass,” The New York Times, May 1, 2014, B2; M. Obschonka, E. Schmitt-Rodermund, R. K. Silbereisen, S. D. Gosling, and J. Potter, “The Regional Distribution and Correlates of an Entrepreneurship-Prone Personality Profile in the United States, Germany, and the United King- dom: A Socioecological Perspective,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (2013): doi: 10.1037/a0032275; D. Olanoff, “Bitly CEO Peter Stern Steps Down from the URL Shortening and Analytics Company,” TC (March 11, 2013), http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/11/bit-ly- ceo-peter-stern-steps-down-from-the-url-shortening-and-analytics-company/; L. Liyen, T. K. Sin, and J. Kuppusamy, “Effects of Personality Traits on Entrepreneurial Success: A Study on Malay- sian Women Entrepreneurs,” Creating Global Competitive Economies: A 360-Degree Approach (2011): 1–4, 18–23; M. Lukes, “Entrepreneurs as Innovators: A Multi-Country Study on Entre- preneurs’ Innovative Behavior,” Prague Economic Papers 22, 1 (2013): 72–84; M. H. Nierhoff, “Twitter Link Shortening Analysis—Bitly Is the Clear Market Leader,” Quintly (September 8, 2014), https://www.quintly.com/blog/2014/09/twitter-link-shortening- analysis-bit-ly-clear- market-leader/; J. Rampton, “5 Personality Traits of an Entrepreneur,” Forbes (April 14, 2014), http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnrampton/2014/04/14/5- personality-traits-of-an- entrepreneur/; and S. Van Anden, “Are True Entrepreneurs Born and Not Made?” CNBC ( November 18, 2014), http://www.cnbc.com/id/102196386.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 137

As you can see from our opening story, personality plays a major role in Mark Josephson’s entrepreneurial success. Personality is indeed a strong factor for many life and work outcomes. We will explain traits such as extraver- sion, conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism—the most defined traits—that were discussed in the story. We’ll also review frameworks that describe an individual’s personality and tendencies.

Personality Why are some people quiet and passive, while others are loud and aggressive? Are certain personality types better adapted than others for certain jobs? Before we can answer these questions, we need to address a more basic one: What is personality?

What Is personality? When we speak of someone’s personality, we use many adjectives to describe how they act and seem to think; in fact, participants in a recent study used 624 distinct adjectives to describe people they knew.1 As organizational behaviorists, however, we organize personality characteristics by overall traits, describing the growth and development of a person’s personality.

Defining personality For our purposes, think of personality as the sum of ways in which an individual reacts to and interacts with others. We most often de- scribe personality in terms of the measurable traits a person exhibits.

Measuring personality Personality assessments have been increasingly used in diverse organizational settings. In fact, eight of the top 10 U.S. private compa- nies and 57 percent of all large U.S. companies use them,2 including Xerox, McDonald’s, and Lowe’s,3 and schools such as DePaul University have begun to use personality tests in their admissions process.4 Personality tests are useful in hiring decisions and help managers forecast who is best for a job.5

The most common means of measuring personality is through self-report surveys in which individuals evaluate themselves on a series of factors, such as “I worry a lot about the future.” In general, when people know their person- ality scores are going to be used for hiring decisions, they rate themselves as about half a standard deviation more conscientious and emotionally stable than if they are taking the test to learn more about themselves.6 Another problem is accuracy; a candidate who is in a bad mood when taking the survey may have inaccurate scores.

Research indicates our culture influences the way we rate ourselves. People in individualistic countries trend toward self-enhancement, while people in collectivist countries like Taiwan, China, and South Korea trend toward self- diminishment. Self-enhancement does not appear to harm a person’s career in individualistic countries, but it does in collectivist countries, where humility is valued. Interestingly, underrating (self-diminishment) may harm a person’s career in both collectivistic and individualistic communities.7

Observer-ratings surveys provide an independent assessment of personality. Here, a coworker or another observer does the rating. Though the results of self-reports and observer-ratings surveys are strongly correlated, research sug- gests observer-ratings surveys predict job success more than self-ratings alone.8 However, each can tell us something unique about an individual’s behavior, so a combination of self-reports and observer reports predicts performance better than any one type of information. The implication is clear: Use both observer

5-1 Describe personality, the way it is measured, and the factors that shape it.

personality The sum total of ways in which an individual reacts to and interacts with others.

138 PART 2 The Individual

I just landed a second-round interview with a great company, and I’m super excited. And super nervous because I’ve read a few articles about how more and more companies are using personality testing. Do you have tips  for how I can put my best foot forward?

— Lauren Dear Lauren: Congratulations! It’s natural for you to want to understand the tests your pro- spective employer uses. You’ve probably deduced that it’s possible to respond in a favorable manner. For example, if a statement says, “I am always prepared,” you know that employers are looking for an applicant who agrees with this state- ment. You might think responding in the most favorable way possible increases your chances of getting hired, and you might be right.

There are a few caveats, however. First, some companies build in “lie scales” that flag individuals who respond to statements in an extremely favorable manner. It’s not always easy to detect

them, but clues usually appear across a number of items. If you respond in the most favorable way to a long list of items, then, you might pop up on the lie scale.

Second, high scores on every trait are not desirable for every kind of job. Some employers might be more interest- ed in low scores on a particular trait or pay more attention to a total profile that would be hard to “game.” For example, agreeableness is not a good predictor of job performance for jobs that are com- petitive in nature (sales, coach, trader).

Third, there is an ethical perspective you should consider. How are you going to feel once you are in the organization if you have not represented yourself correctly in the hiring process? What is your general attitude toward lying? How are you going to make sure your behav- ior fits the traits you tried to portray?

Finally, perhaps you should look at the assessment differently. The organiza- tion—and you—should be looking for a good match. If you are not a good match and are hired, you are likely to be unsuc- cessful, and miserable in the process.

However, if you have a good, honest match, you can arrive for your first day confident and ready for success.

In the end, you might increase your chances of getting hired by responding to a personality test in a favorable man- ner. However, we still think honesty is the best policy—for you and for your future employer!

Sources: M. N. Bing, H. K. Davison, and J. Smothers, “Item-Level Frame-of-Reference Effects in Personality Testing: An Investiga- tion of Incremental Validity in an Organi- zational Setting,” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 22, no. 2 (2014): 165–78; P. R. Sackett and P. T. Walmsley, “Which Personality Attributes Are Most Im- portant in the Workplace?” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 5 (2014): 538– 51; and L. Weber, “To Get a Job, New Hires are Put to the Test,” The Wall Street Journal, April 15, 2015, A1, A10.

The opinions provided here are of the authors only. The authors are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or any- one else for any decision made or action tak- en in reliance on the opinions provided here.

How do i ace the personality test? career oBjectives

ratings and self-report ratings of personality when making important employ- ment decisions.

personality Determinants An early debate centered on whether an individual’s personality is the result of heredity or environment. Personality appears to be a result of both; however, research tends to support the importance of heredity over environment.

Heredity refers to factors determined at conception. Physical stature, facial features, gender, temperament, muscle composition and reflexes, energy level, and biological rhythms are either completely or substantially influenced by parentage—by your biological parents’ biological, physiological, and inherent psychological makeup. The heredity approach argues that the ultimate expla- nation of an individual’s personality is the molecular structure of the genes, located on the chromosomes.

This is not to suggest that personality never changes. People’s scores on dependability tend to increase over time, as when young adults start families and establish careers. However, strong individual differences in dependability remain; everyone tends to change by about the same amount, so their rank

heredity Factors determined at conception; one’s biological, physiological, and inherent psychological makeup.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 139

Energetic, charismatic, decisive, am- bitious, adaptable, courageous, and industrious are personality traits used to describe Richard Branson, chairman of Virgin Group. These traits helped Branson, shown here promoting Virgin Trains, build one of the most recog- nized and respected global brands in travel, entertainment, and lifestyle. Source: Rex Features/AP Images

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

order stays roughly the same.9 Furthermore, personality is more changeable in adolescence and more stable among adults.10

Early work on personality tried to identify and label enduring characteristics that describe an individual’s behavior, including shy, aggressive, submissive, lazy, ambitious, loyal, and timid. When someone exhibits these characteristics in a large number of situations and they are relatively enduring over time, we call them personality traits.11 The more consistent the characteristic over time, and the more frequently it occurs in diverse situations, the more important the trait is in describing the individual.

Personal InvenTory assessmenTs

Personality Style Indicator

What’s your personality? You’ve probably been wondering as you read this chapter. Take this PIA to obtain some indications of your personality style.

Personality Frameworks Throughout history, people have sought to understand what makes individu- als behave in myriad ways. Many of our behaviors stem from our personalities, so understanding the components of personality helps us predict behavior. Important theoretical frameworks and assessment tools help us categorize and study the dimensions of personality.

The most widely used and best known personality frameworks are the Myers- Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Big Five Personality Model. Both describe a person’s total personality through exploration of the facets of personality. Other frameworks, such as the Dark Triad, explain certain aspects, but not the total, of an individual’s personality. We discuss each below, but let’s begin with the dominant frameworks.

personality traits enduring characteris- tics that describe an individual’s behavior.

5-2 Describe the strengths and weaknesses of the myers- Briggs Type Indicator (mBTI) personality framework and the Big Five model.

140 PART 2 The Individual

the Myers-Briggs type Indicator The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is the most widely used personality- assessment instrument in the world.12 It is a 100-question personality test that asks people how they usually feel or act in situations. Respondents are classified as extraverted or introverted (E or I), sensing or intuitive (S or N), thinking or feeling (T or F), and judging or perceiving (J or P):

• Extraverted (E) versus Introverted (I). Extraverted individuals are outgo- ing, sociable, and assertive. Introverts are quiet and shy.

• Sensing (S) versus Intuitive (N). Sensing types are practical and prefer routine and order, and they focus on details. Intuitives rely on uncon- scious processes and look at the “big picture.”

• Thinking (T) versus Feeling (F). Thinking types use reason and logic to handle problems. Feeling types rely on their personal values and emotions.

• Judging (J) versus Perceiving (P). Judging types want control and prefer order and structure. Perceiving types are flexible and spontaneous.

The MBTI describes personality types by identifying one trait from each of the four pairs. For example, Introverted/Intuitive/Thinking/Judging people (INTJs) are visionaries with original minds and great drive. They are skeptical, critical, independent, determined, and often stubborn. ENFJs are natural teach- ers and leaders. They are relational, motivational, intuitive, idealistic, ethical, and kind. ESTJs are organizers. They are realistic, logical, analytical, and decisive, per- fect for business or mechanics. The ENTP type is innovative, individualistic, versa- tile, and attracted to entrepreneurial ideas. This person tends to be resourceful in solving challenging problems but may neglect routine assignments.

According to the Myers & Briggs Foundation, introverts account for over 50 percent of the E/I responses in the U.S. population. Indeed, two of the three most common MBTI types are introverts: ISFJ and ISTJ. ISFJs are nurturing and responsible, and ISTJs are dutiful and logical. The least common types are INFJ (insightful and protective) and ENTJ (focused and decisive).13

The MBTI is used in a variety of organizational settings. It is taken by over 2.5 million people each year and 89 of the Fortune 100 companies use it.14 Evi- dence is mixed about its validity as a measure of personality; however, most is against it.15 As Professor Dan Ariely noted about MBTI results, “Next time, just look at the horoscope. It is just as valid and takes less time.”16

One problem with the MBTI is that the model forces a person into one type or another; that is, you’re either introverted or extraverted. There is no in- between. Another problem is with the reliability of the measure: When people retake the assessment, they often receive different results. An additional prob- lem is in the difficulty of interpretation. There are levels of importance for each of the MBTI facets, and separate meanings for certain combinations of facets, all of which require trained interpretation that can leave room for error. Finally, results from the MBTI tend to be unrelated to job performance. The MBTI can thus be a valuable tool for increasing self-awareness and providing career guid- ance, but because results tend to be unrelated to job performance, managers should consider using the Big Five Personality Model, discussed next, as the personality selection test for job candidates instead.

the Big five personality Model The MBTI may lack strong supporting evidence, but an impressive body of research supports the Big Five Model, which proposes that five basic dimensions underlie all others and encompass most of the significant variation in human per- sonality.17 Test scores of these traits do a very good job of predicting how people

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) a personality test that taps four characteris- tics and classifies people into one of 16 personality types.

Big Five Model a personality assessment model that taps five basic dimensions.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 141

behave in a variety of real-life situations18 and remain relatively stable for an indi- vidual over time, with some daily variations.19 These are the Big Five factors:

• Conscientiousness. The conscientiousness dimension is a measure of reliability. A highly conscientious person is responsible, organized, dependable, and persistent. Those who score low on this dimension are easily distracted, disorganized, and unreliable.

• Emotional stability. The emotional stability dimension taps a person’s ability to withstand stress. People with emotional stability tend to be calm, self-confident, and secure. High scorers are more likely to be positive and optimistic and experience fewer negative emotions; they are gener- ally happier than low scorers. Emotional stability is sometimes discussed as its converse, neuroticism. Low scorers (those with high neuroticism) are hypervigilant and vulnerable to the physical and psychological effects of stress. Those with high neuroticism tend to be nervous, anxious, depressed, and insecure.

• Extraversion. The extraversion dimension captures our comfort level with relationships. Extraverts tend to be gregarious, assertive, and sociable. They are generally happier and are often ambitious.20 They experience more positive emotions than do introverts, and they more freely express these feelings. On the other hand, introverts (low extraversion) tend to be more thoughtful, reserved, timid, and quiet.

• Openness to experience. The openness to experience dimension addresses the range of interests and fascination with novelty. Open people are creative, curious, and artistically sensitive. Those at the low end of the category are conventional and find comfort in the familiar.

• Agreeableness. The agreeableness dimension refers to an individual’s propensity to defer to others. Agreeable people are cooperative, warm, and trusting. You might expect agreeable people to be happier than disagreeable people. They are, but only slightly. When people choose organizational team members, agreeable individuals are usually their first choice. In contrast, people who score low on agreeableness are cold and antagonistic.

conscientiousness a personality dimension that describes someone who is responsible, dependable, persistent, and organized.

emotional stability a personality dimension that characterizes someone as calm, self-confident, and secure (positive) versus nervous, depressed, and insecure (negative).

extraversion a personality dimension describing someone who is sociable, gregarious, and assertive.

openness to experience a personality dimension that characterizes someone in terms of imagination, sensitivity, and curiosity.

agreeableness a personality dimension that describes someone who is good natured, cooperative, and trusting.

General Motors CEO Mary Barra is unusual in that she appears to score high on all of the Big Five personality dimensions. Her unique combination of traits has helped her become the first female CEO of a major global automaker. Source: Michael Buholzer/Photoshot/Newscom

142 PART 2 The Individual

How Do the Big five traits predict Behavior at Work? There are many relation- ships between the Big Five personality dimensions and job performance,21 and we are learning more about them every day. Let’s explore one trait at a time, beginning with the strongest predictor of job performance—conscientiousness.

conscientiousness at Work As researchers recently stated, “Personal attributes related to conscientiousness and agreeableness are important for success across many jobs, spanning across low to high levels of job complexity, training, and experience.”22 Employees who score higher in conscientiousness develop higher levels of job knowledge, probably because highly conscientious people learn more (conscientiousness may be related to GPA),23 and these levels cor- respond with higher levels of job performance. Conscientious people are also more able to maintain their job performance when faced with abusive supervi- sion, according to a recent study in India.24

Conscientiousness is important to overall organizational success. As Exhibit 5-1 shows, a study of the personality scores of 313 CEO candidates in private equity companies (of whom 225 were hired) found conscientiousness— in the form of persistence, attention to detail, and setting high standards—was more important to success than other traits.

Like any trait, conscientiousness has pitfalls. Highly conscientious individu- als can prioritize work over family, resulting in more conflict between their work and family roles (termed work-family conflict).25 They may also become too focused on their own work to help others in the organization,26 and they don’t adapt well to changing contexts. Furthermore, conscientious people may have trouble learning complex skills early in a training process because their focus is on performing well rather than on learning. Finally, they are often less creative, especially artistically.27

Conscientiousness is the best predictor of job performance. However, the other Big Five traits are also related to aspects of performance and have other implications for work and for life. Exhibit 5-2 summarizes.

emotional Stability at Work Of the Big Five traits, emotional stability is most strongly related to life satisfaction, job satisfaction, and low stress levels. People with high emotional stability can adapt to unexpected or changing demands in the workplace.28 At the other end of the spectrum, neurotic individuals, who may be unable to cope with these demands, may experience burnout.29 These people also tend to experience work-family conflict, which can affect work outcomes.30

extraversion at Work Extraverts perform better in jobs with significant inter- personal interaction. They are socially dominant, “take charge” people who are usually more assertive than introverts.31 Extraversion is a relatively strong

traits that Matter Most to Business Success at Buyout companies

Exhibit 5-1

Most Important Less Important

Persistence Strong oral communication

Attention to detail Teamwork

Efficiency Flexibility/adaptability

Analytical skills Enthusiasm

Setting high standards Listening skills

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 143

predictor of leadership emergence in groups. Some negatives are that extra- verts are more impulsive than introverts, more likely to be absent from work, and may be more likely than introverts to lie during job interviews.32

openness at Work Open people are more likely to be effective leaders—and more comfortable with ambiguity. They cope better with organizational change and are more adaptable. While openness isn’t related to initial performance on a job, individuals higher in openness are less susceptible to a decline in performance over a longer time period.33 Open people also experience less work-family conflict.34

agreeableness at Work Agreeable individuals are better liked than disagreeable people; they tend to do better in interpersonally-oriented jobs such as customer service. They’re more compliant and rule abiding, less likely to get into acci- dents, and more satisfied in their jobs. They also contribute to organizational performance by engaging in organizational citizenship behavior (OCB).35 Dis- agreeable people, on the other hand, are more likely to engage in counterpro- ductive work behaviors (CWBs), as are people low in conscientiousness.36 Low agreeableness also predicts involvement in work accidents.37 Lastly, agreeable- ness is associated with lower levels of career success (especially earnings), per haps because highly agreeable people consider themselves less marketable and are less willing to assert themselves.38

In general, the Big Five personality factors appear in almost all cross- cultural studies,39 including China, Israel, Germany, Japan, Spain, Nigeria, Norway,

Model of How Big five traits Influence oB criteriaExhibit 5-2

• Less negative thinking and fewer negative emotions • Less hypervigilant

• Higher job and life satisfaction • Lower stress levels

• Better interpersonal skills • Greater social dominance • More emotionally expressive

Extraversion • Higher performance • Enhanced leadership • Higher job and life satisfaction

• Increased learning • More creative • More flexible and autonomous

Openness • Training performance • Enhanced leadership • More adaptable to change

• Better liked • More compliant and conforming

Agreeableness • Higher performance • Lower levels of deviant behavior

• Greater effort and persistence • More drive and discipline • Better organized and planning

Conscientiousness • Higher performance • Enhanced leadership • Greater longevity

BIG FIVE TRAITS WHY IS IT RELEVANT? WHAT DOES IT AFFECT?

Emotional stability

144 PART 2 The Individual

Pakistan, and the United States. However, a study of illiterate indigenous people in Bolivia suggested the Big Five framework may be less applicable when study- ing the personalities of small, remote groups.40

Try IT! If your professor has assigned this, go to the assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: Individual Behavior.

Research indicates the Big Five traits have the most verifiable links to impor- tant organizational outcomes, but they are not the only traits a person exhibits, nor the only ones with OB implications. Let’s discuss some other traits, known collectively as the Dark Triad.

the Dark triad With the exception of neuroticism, the Big Five traits are what we call socially desirable, meaning we would be glad to score high on them. Researchers have found three other socially undesirable traits, which we all have in varying degrees, are also relevant to organizational behavior: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy. Owing to their negative nature, researchers have labeled these the Dark Triad—though they do not always occur together.41

The Dark Triad may sound sinister, but these traits are not clinical patholo- gies hindering everyday functioning. They might be expressed particularly strongly when an individual is under stress and unable to moderate any inap- propriate responses. Sustained high levels of dark personality traits can cause individuals to derail their careers and personal lives.42

Machiavellianism Hao is a young bank manager in Shanghai. He’s received three promotions in the past 4 years and makes no apologies for the aggressive tactics he’s used. “My name means clever, and that’s what I am—I do whatever I have to do to get ahead,” he says. Hao would be termed Machiavellian.

The personality characteristic of Machiavellianism (often abbreviated Mach) is named after Niccolo Machiavelli, who wrote in the sixteenth century on how to gain and use power. An individual high in Machiavellianism is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes ends can justify means. “If it works, use it” is consistent with a high-Mach perspective. High Machs manipulate more, win more, are persuaded less by others, but persuade others more than do low Machs.43 They are more likely to act aggressively and engage in CWBs as well. Surprisingly, Machiavellianism does not significantly predict overall job performance.44 High-Mach employees, by manipulating others to their advan- tage, win in the short term at a job, but they lose those gains in the long term because they are not well liked.

Machiavellianism tendencies may have ethical implications. One study showed high-Mach job seekers were less positively affected by the knowledge that an organization engaged in a high level of corporate social responsibility (CSR),45 suggesting that high-Mach people may care less about sustainability issues. Another study found Machs’ ethical leadership behaviors were less likely to translate into followers’ work engagement because followers see through these behaviors and realize it is a case of surface acting.46

narcissism Sabrina likes to be the center of attention. She often looks at her- self in the mirror, has extravagant dreams about her future, and considers her- self a person of many talents. Sabrina is a narcissist. The trait is named for the

Dark Triad a constellation of negative per- sonality traits consisting of machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy.

Machiavellianism The degree to which an individual is pragmatic, maintains emotional distance, and believes that ends can justify means.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 145

Greek myth of Narcissus, a youth so vain and proud he fell in love with his own image. In psychology, narcissism describes a person who has a grandiose sense of self-importance, requires excessive admiration, and is arrogant. Narcis- sists often have fantasies of grand success, a tendency to exploit situations and people, a sense of entitlement, and a lack of empathy.47 However, narcissists can be hypersensitive and fragile people.48 They also may experience more anger.49

While narcissism seems to have little relationship to job effectiveness or OCB,50 it is one of the largest predictors of increased CWB in individualistic cultures—but not in collectivist cultures that discourage self-promotion.51 Nar- cissists commonly think they are overqualified for their positions.52 When they receive feedback about their performance, they often tune out information that conflicts with their positive self-perception, but they will work harder if rewards are offered.53

On the bright side, narcissists may be more charismatic than others.54 They also might be found in business more often than in other fields (see OB Poll). They are more likely to be chosen for leadership positions, and medium ratings of narcissism (neither extremely high nor extremely low) are positively correlated with leadership effectiveness.55 Some evidence suggests that narcissists are more adaptable and make better business decisions than others when the issue is com- plex.56 Furthermore, a study of Norwegian bank employees found those scoring high on narcissism enjoyed their work more.57

Special attention has been paid to narcissistic CEOs who make more acquisi- tions, pay higher premiums for those acquisitions, respond less clearly to objec- tive measures of performance, and respond to media praise by making even more acquisitions.58 Research using data compiled over 100 years has shown that nar- cissistic CEOs of baseball organizations generate higher levels of manager turn- over, although members of external organizations see them as more influential.59

Narcissism and its effects are not confined to CEOs or celebrities. Like the effects of Machiavellianism, those of narcissism vary by context, but are evident in all areas of life.

psychopathy Psychopathy is part of the Dark Triad, but in organizational behav- ior, it does not connote clinical mental illness. In the OB context, psychopathy is

narcissism The tendency to be arrogant, have a grandiose sense of self-importance, require excessive admiration, and have a sense of entitlement.

psychopathy The tendency for a lack of concern for others and a lack of guilt or remorse when actions cause harm.

Does business school Make You narcissistic? Ob POLL

Source: Based on J. W. Westerman, J. Z. Bergman, S. M. Bergman, and J. P. Daly, “Are Universities Creating Millennial Narcissistic Employees? An Empirical

Examination of Narcissism in Business Students and Its Implications,” Journal of Management Education 36 (2012), 5–32.

Does Business School Make You Narcissistic?

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

Men

Average levels of narcissism by college major and gender

Women

Business

Men Women

Psychology

OB Poll

146 PART 2 The Individual

defined as a lack of concern for others, and a lack of guilt or remorse when ac- tions cause harm.60 Measures of psychopathy attempt to assess the motivation to comply with social norms, impulsivity, willingness to use deceit to obtain desired ends, and disregard, that is, lack of empathic concern for others.

The literature is not consistent about whether psychopathy is important to work behavior. One review found little correlation between measures of psy- chopathy and job performance or CWB. Another found antisocial personality, which is closely related to psychopathy, was positively related to advancement in the organization but unrelated to other aspects of career success and effective- ness.61 Still other research suggests psychopathy is related to the use of hard influence tactics (threats, manipulation) and bullying work behavior (physical or verbal threatening).62 The cunning displayed by people who score high on psychopathy may thus help them gain power in an organization but keep them from using it toward healthy ends for themselves or their organizations.

other traits The Dark Triad is a helpful framework for studying the three dominant dark-side traits in current personality research, and researchers are exploring other traits as well. One emerging framework incorporates five ad- ditional aberrant compound traits based on the Big Five. First, antisocial people are indifferent and callous toward others. They use their extraversion to charm people, but they may be prone to violent CWBs and risky decision making. Second, borderline people have low self-esteem and high uncertainty. They are unpredictable in their interactions at work, are inefficient, and may have low job satisfaction. Their low self-esteem can lead to clinical depression.63 Third, schizotypal individuals are eccentric and disorganized. In the workplace, they can be highly creative, although they are susceptible to work stress. Fourth, obsessive- compulsive people are perfectionists and can be stubborn, yet they attend to details, carry a strong work ethic, and may be motivated by achievement. Fifth, avoidant individuals feel inadequate and hate criticism. They can function only in environments requiring little interaction.64

Personality traits have both positive and negative aspects. The degree of each trait—the Big Five, the Dark Triad, and others—in a person, and the combi- nation of traits, matter a great deal to organizational outcomes. It would be easy to make quick management decisions based on our observations, but it is important to keep discussions on personality in perspective and to consider other theories.

Other Personality Attributes Relevant to OB As we’ve discussed, studies of traits have much to offer to the field of OB. Now we’ll look at other attributes that are powerful predictors of behavior in organiza- tions: core self-evaluations, self-monitoring, and proactive personality.

core Self-evaluations (cSes) Core self-evaluations (CSEs) are bottom-line conclusions individuals have about their capabilities, competence, and worth as a person. People who have positive CSEs like themselves and see themselves as effective and in control of their envi- ronment. Those with negative CSEs tend to dislike themselves, question their capabilities, and view themselves as powerless over their environment.65 Recall we discussed in Chapter 3 that CSEs relate to job satisfaction because people who are positive on this trait see more challenge in their jobs and actually attain more complex jobs.

5-3 Discuss how the concepts of core self-evaluation (Cse), self-monitoring, and proactive personality contribute to the under- standing of personality.

core self-evaluation (CSE) Bottom- line conclusions individuals have about their capabilities, competence, and worth as a person.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 147

People with positive CSEs perform better than others because they set more ambitious goals, are more committed to their goals, and persist longer in attempting to reach them. People who have high CSEs provide better customer service, are more popular coworkers, and may have careers that begin on bet- ter footing and ascend more rapidly over time.66 They perform especially well if they feel their work provides meaning and is helpful to others.67 Therefore, people with high CSEs may thrive in organizations with high corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Self-Monitoring Zoe is always in trouble at work. Although she’s competent, hardworking, and productive, she receives average ratings in performance reviews, and seems to have made a career out of irritating her bosses. Zoe’s problem is that she’s politi- cally inept and unable to adjust her behavior to fit changing situations. As she said, “I’m true to myself. I don’t remake myself to please others.” Zoe is a low self-monitor.

Self-monitoring describes an individual’s ability to adjust behavior to exter- nal, situational factors.68 High self-monitors show considerable adaptability in adjusting their behavior to external situational factors. They are highly sensitive to external cues and can behave differently in varying situations, sometimes pre- senting striking contradictions between their public personae and their private selves. Low self-monitors like Zoe can’t disguise themselves in that way. They tend to display their true dispositions and attitudes in every situation; hence, there is high behavioral consistency between who they are and what they do.

Evidence indicates high self-monitors pay closer attention to the behavior of others and are more capable of conforming than are low self-monitors.69 High self-monitor employees show less commitment to their organizations, but receive better performance ratings and are more likely to emerge as leaders.70 High self-monitor managers tend to be more mobile in their careers, receive

self-monitoring a personality trait that measures an individual’s ability to adjust his or her behavior to external, situational factors.

Blake Mycoskie, founder of TOMS Shoes, is confident, capable, and ef- fective. His high core self-evaluations enabled him to realize his dream of a company that uses profits to give shoes to children in need. Source: Donato Sardella/Getty Images

148 PART 2 The Individual

Surprisingly, this statement ap-pears to be true.Research indicates that indi- viduals can accurately appraise others’ personalities only a few seconds after first meeting them, or sometimes even from a photo. This “zero acquaintance” approach shows that regardless of the way in which people first meet someone, whether in person or online, their first judgments about the other’s personality have validity. In one study, for example, individuals were asked to introduce themselves in, on average, 7.4 seconds. Observers’ ratings of those individuals’ extraversion were significantly corre- lated with the individuals’ self-reported extraversion. Other research suggests personalities can be surmised from on- line profiles at zero acquaintance as well. One study even found that participants were able to determine the personality traits of individuals at the ends of the trait spectrum from viewing only photos.

Some traits, such as extraversion, are easier to perceive than others upon initial acquaintance, but less obvious

traits like self-esteem are also often judged fairly accurately by others. Even being forced to make intuitive, quick judgments rather than deliberate evalu- ations does not seem to undermine the accuracy of the appraisals.

Situations make a difference in the accuracy of the judgments for some personality traits. For example, although neuroticism is perhaps the most diffi- cult trait to detect accurately, a recent study found neuroticism could be judged much more accurately when the situa- tion made the individual react nervously. This makes sense when you consider that some situations activate or draw out a trait much more readily than oth- ers. Almost everybody looks calm when they’re about to fall asleep!

The moderate accuracy of “thin slic- es” helps to explain the moderate va- lidity of employment interviews, which we discuss in Chapter 17. Specifically, research shows that interviewers make up their minds about candidates within 2 minutes of first meeting them. While this is hardly an ideal way to make

important employment decisions, the research on personality shows these judgments do have some level of va- lidity. It is important to keep in mind, however, that though we can ascer- tain people’s personalities quickly, we should still keep an open mind and sus- pend judgment. There is always more to people than first meets the eye.

Sources: A. Beer, “Comparative Personal- ity Judgments: Replication and Extension of Robust Findings in Personality Percep- tion Using an Alternative Method,” Journal of Personality Assessment 96, no. 6 (2014): 610–18; S. Hirschmueller, B. Egloff, S.  C. Schmukle, S. Nestler, and M. D. Back, “ Accurate Judgments of Neuroticism at Zero Acquaintance: A Question of Relevance,” Journal of Personality 83, no. 2 (2015): 221– 28; S. Hirschmüller, B. Egloff, S. Nestler, and D. Mitja, “The Dual Lens Model: A Comprehen- sive Framework for Understanding Self–Other Agreement of Personality Judgments at Zero Acquaintance,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104 (2013): 335–53; and J. M. Stopfer, B. Egloff, S. Nestler, and M. D. Back, “Personality Expression and Impres- sion Formation in Online Social Networks: An Integrative Approach to Understanding the Processes of Accuracy, Impression Manage- ment, and Meta-Accuracy,” European Journal of Personality 28 (2014): 73–94.

We can accurately judge individuals’ Personalities a Few seconds after Meeting them

Myth or Science?

more promotions (both internal and cross-organizational), and are more likely to occupy central positions in organizations.71

proactive personality Did you ever notice that some people actively take the initiative to improve their current circumstances or create new ones? These are proactive personalities.72 Those with a proactive personality identify opportunities, show initiative, take action, and persevere until meaningful change occurs, compared to others who generally react to situations. Proactive individuals have many desirable behaviors that organizations covet. They have higher levels of job performance73 and do not need much oversight.74 They are receptive to changes in job demands and thrive when they can informally tailor their jobs to their strengths. Proactive individuals often achieve career success.75

Proactive personality may be important for work teams. One study of 95 R&D teams in 33 Chinese companies revealed that teams with high-average levels of proactive personality were more innovative.76 Proactive individuals are also more likely to exchange information with others in a team, which builds trust relationships.77 Like other traits, proactive personality is affected by the context. One study of bank branch teams in China found that if a team’s leader was not

proactive personality People who identify opportunities, show initiative, take action, and persevere until meaningful change occurs.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 149

proactive, the benefits of the team’s proactivity became dormant or, worse, was suppressed by the leader.78 In terms of pitfalls, one study of 231 Flemish unem- ployed individuals found that proactive individuals abandoned their job searches sooner. It may be that proactivity includes stepping back in the face of failure.79

In short, while proactive personality may be important to individual and team performance, it has downsides, and its effectiveness may depend on the context. Do you think personality changes in different situations? Let’s explore this possibility.

Personality and Situations Earlier we discussed how research shows heredity is more important than the environment in developing our personalities. The environment is not irrelevant, though. Some personality traits, such as the Big Five, tend to be effective in almost any environment or situation. For example, research indicates conscientiousness is helpful to the performance of most jobs, and extraversion is related to emergence as a leader in most situations. However, we are learning that the effect of particular traits on organizational behavior depends on the situation. Two theoretical frame- works, situation strength and trait activation, help explain how this works.

Situation Strength theory Imagine you are in a meeting with your department. How likely are you to walk out, shout at someone, or turn your back on everyone? Probably highly unlikely. Now imagine working from home. You might work in your pajamas, listen to loud music, or take a catnap.

Situation strength theory proposes that the way personality translates into behavior depends on the strength of the situation. By situation strength, we mean the degree to which norms, cues, or standards dictate appropriate behavior. Strong situations show us what the right behavior is, pressure us to exhibit it, and discourage the wrong behavior. In weak situations, conversely, “anything goes,” and thus we are freer to express our personality in behavior. Thus, per- sonality traits better predict behavior in weak situations than in strong ones.

Researchers have analyzed situation strength in organizations in terms of four elements:80

1. Clarity, or the degree to which cues about work duties and responsibilities are available and clear. Jobs high in clarity produce strong situations because individuals can readily determine what to do. For example, the job of janitor probably provides higher clarity about each task than the job of nanny.

2. Consistency, or the extent to which cues regarding work duties and respon- sibilities are compatible with one another. Jobs with high consistency rep- resent strong situations because all the cues point toward the same desired behavior. The job of acute care nurse, for example, probably has higher consistency than the job of manager.

3. Constraints, or the extent to which individuals’ freedom to decide or act is lim- ited by forces outside their control. Jobs with many constraints represent strong situations because an individual has limited individual discretion. Bank exam- iner, for example, is probably a job with stronger constraints than forest ranger.

4. Consequences, or the degree to which decisions or actions have important implications for the organization or its members, clients, supplies, and so on. Jobs with important consequences represent strong situations because the environment is probably heavily structured to guard against mistakes. A  surgeon’s job, for example, has higher consequences than a foreign- language teacher’s.

5-4 Describe how the situation affects whether personality predicts behavior.

situation strength theory a theory indicating that the way personality translates into behavior depends on the strength of the situation.

150 PART 2 The Individual

Some researchers have speculated organizations are, by definition, strong situations because they impose rules, norms, and standards that govern behav- ior. These constraints are usually appropriate. For example, we would not want an employee to feel free to engage in sexual harassment, follow questionable accounting procedures, or come to work only when the mood strikes.

Beyond the basics, though, it is not always desirable for organizations to create strong situations for their employees for a number of reasons. First, the elements of situation strength are often determined by organization rules and guidelines, which adds some objectivity to them. However, the percep- tion of these rules influences how the person will respond to the situation’s strength. For instance, a person who is usually self-directed may view step-by- step instructions (high clarity) for a simple task as a lack of faith in his ability. Another person who is a rule-follower might appreciate the detailed instruc- tions. Their responses (and work attitudes) will reflect their perception of the situation.81

Second, jobs with myriad rules and tightly controlled processes can be dull or demotivating. Imagine that all work was executed with an assembly-line approach. Some people may prefer the routine, but many prefer having some variety and freedom. Third, strong situations might suppress the creativity, ini- tiative, and discretion prized by some organizational cultures. One recent study, for example, found that in weak organizational situations, employees were more likely to behave proactively in accordance with their values.82 Finally, work is increasingly complex and interrelated globally. Creating strong rules to govern diverse systems might be not only difficult but also unwise. In sum, managers need to recognize the role of situation strength in the workplace and find the appropriate balance.

trait activation theory Another important theoretical framework toward understanding personality and situations is trait activation theory (TAT). TAT predicts that some situations, events, or interventions “activate” a trait more than others. Using TAT, we can foresee which jobs suit certain personalities. For example, a commission-based compensation plan would likely activate individual differences because extra- verts are more reward-sensitive, than, say, open people. Conversely, in jobs that encourage creativity, differences in openness may better predict desired behav- ior than differences in extraversion. See Exhibit 5-3 for specific examples.

TAT also applies to personality tendencies. For example, a recent study found people learning online responded differently when their behavior was being electronically monitored. Those who had a high fear of failure had higher apprehension from the monitoring than others and learned significantly less. In this case, a feature of the environment (electronic monitoring) activated a trait (fear of failing), and the combination of the two meant lowered job per- formance.83 TAT can also work in a positive way. One study found that, in a supportive environment, everyone behaved prosocially, but in a harsh environ- ment, only people with prosocial tendencies exhibited them.84

Together, situation strength and trait activation theories show that the debate over nature versus nurture might best be framed as nature and nurture. Not only does each affect behavior, but they interact with one another. Put another way, personality and the situation both affect work behavior, but when the situa- tion is right, the power of personality to predict behavior is even higher.

Having discussed personality traits, we now turn to values. Values are often very specific and describe belief systems rather than behavioral tendencies. Some beliefs or values reflect a person’s personality, but we don’t always act consistently with our values.

trait activation theory (TAT) a theory that predicts that some situations, events, or interventions “activate” a trait more than others.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 151

Values Is capital punishment right or wrong? Is a desire for power good or bad? The answers to these questions are value-laden.

Values represent basic convictions that “a specific mode of conduct or end- state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence.”85 Values contain a judgmental ele- ment because they carry an individual’s ideas about what is right, good, or desir- able. They have both content and intensity attributes. The content attribute says a mode of conduct or end-state of existence is important. The intensity attribute specifies how important it is. When we rank values in terms of intensity, we obtain that person’s value system. We all have a hierarchy of values according to the relative importance we assign to values such as freedom, pleasure, self-respect, honesty, obedience, and equality.

Values tend to be relatively stable and enduring.86 Many of the values we hold are established in our early years—by parents, teachers, friends, and oth- ers. If we question our values, they may change, but more often they are rein- forced. There is also evidence linking personality to values, implying our values may be partly determined by genetically transmitted traits.87 Open people, for example, may be more politically liberal, whereas conscientious people may place a greater value on safe and ethical conduct. To explore the topic further, we will discuss the importance and organization of values first.

the Importance and organization of Values Values lay the foundation for understanding attitudes and motivation, and they influence our perceptions. We enter an organization with preconceived notions of what “ought” and “ought not” to be. These notions contain our interpreta- tions of right and wrong and our preferences for certain behaviors or outcomes. Regardless of whether they clarify or bias our judgment, our values influence our attitudes and behaviors at work.

5-5 Contrast terminal and instrumental values.

value system a hierarchy based on a ranking of an individual’s values in terms of their intensity.

values Basic convictions that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an oppo- site or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence.

trait activation theory: Jobs in Which certain Big five traits are More relevantExhibit 5-3

Note: A plus (+) sign means individuals who score high on this trait should do better in this job. A minus (-) sign means individuals who score low on this trait should do better in this job.

Detail Orientation Required

Social Skills Required

Competitive Work

Innovation Required

Dealing with Angry People

Time Pressure (Deadlines)

Jobs scoring high (the traits listed here should predict behavior in these jobs)

Air traffic controller

Accountant

Legal secretary

Clergy

Therapist

Concierge

Coach/scout

Financial manager

Sales representative

Actor

Systems analyst

Advertising writer

Correctional officer

Telemarketer

Flight attendant

Broadcast news analyst

Editor

Airline pilot

Jobs scoring low (the traits listed here should not predict behavior in these jobs)

Forester Software engineer Postal clerk Court reporter Composer Skincare specialist

Masseuse Pump operator Historian Archivist Biologist Mathematician

Model Broadcast technician

Nuclear reactor operator

Medical technician

Statistician Fitness trainer

Jobs that score high activate these traits (make them more relevant to predicting behavior)

Conscientiousness (+) Extraversion (+) Agreeableness (+)

Extraversion (+) Agreeableness (–)

Openness (+) Extraversion (+) Agreeableness (+) Neuroticism (–)

Conscientiousness (+) Neuroticism (–)

152 PART 2 The Individual

While values can sometimes augment decision making, at times they can cloud objectivity and rationality.88 Suppose you enter an organization with the view that allocating pay on the basis of performance is right, while allocating pay on the basis of seniority is wrong. How will you react if you find the organiza- tion you’ve just joined rewards seniority and not performance? You’re likely to be disappointed—this can lead to job dissatisfaction and a decision not to exert a high level of effort because “It’s probably not going to lead to more money anyway.” Would your attitudes and behavior be different if your values aligned with the organization’s pay policies? Most likely.

WATCh IT! If your professor has assigned this, go to the assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Honest Tea: Ethics—Company Mission and Values.

terminal versus Instrumental Values How can we organize values? One researcher—Milton Rokeach—argued that we can separate them into two categories. One set, called terminal values, refers to desirable end-states. These are the goals a person would like to achieve during a lifetime. The other set, called instrumental values, refers to preferable modes of behavior, or means of achieving the terminal values. Some examples of termi- nal values are prosperity and economic success, freedom, health and well-being, world peace, and meaning in life. Examples of instrumental values are autonomy and self-reliance, personal discipline, kindness, and goal-orientation. Each of us places value on both the ends (terminal values) and the means (instrumental values). A balance between the two is important, as well as an understanding of how to strike this balance.

Generational Values Researchers have integrated several analyses of work values into groups that attempt to capture the shared views of different cohorts or generations in the U.S. workforce.89 You will surely be familiar with the labels, some of which are used internationally. It is important to remember that while categories are helpful, they represent trends … not the beliefs of individuals.

Exhibit 5-4 segments employees by the era during which they entered the workforce. Because most people start work between the ages of 18 and 23, the eras also correlate closely with employee age.

terminal values Desirable end-states of existence; the goals a person would like to achieve during his or her lifetime.

instrumental values Preferable modes of behavior or means of achieving one’s terminal values.

Dominant Work Values in today’s WorkforceExhibit 5-4

Entered the Approximate Cohort Workforce Current Age Dominant Work Values

Boomers 1965–1985 50s to 70s Success, achievement, ambition, dislike of authority; loyalty to career

Xers 1985–2000 Mid-30s to 50s Work-life balance, team-oriented, dislike of rules; loyalty to relationships

Millennials 2000 to present To mid-30s Confident, financial success, self- reliant but team-oriented; loyalty to both self and relationships

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 153

Stories of widespread cheating have been on the rise, leading many experts to conclude that the inci- dence of cheating is increasing. Recent- ly a major cheating scandal was uncov- ered at Harvard University, where more than 125 students were found to be in- volved in an organized cheating scheme.

Like most complex behaviors, cheat- ing in school, at work, and in life is a product of the person and the situation. As for the person, research reveals cer- tain traits are related to the tendency to cheat, including high levels of narcis- sism, low levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness, and high levels of competitiveness.

As for the situation, cheating in- creases when it is easier to cheat (such as on take-home exams), when there is greater pressure to cheat, and when clear standards are lacking or are not reinforced (such as when an

organization’s sexual harassment poli- cy is not communicated to employees).

How can this research help inform you as a student and employee?

1. Recognize situations that are more likely to provoke pressures to cheat. Being explicit and open with yourself about your response to pressure should keep you from succumbing to a moral blind spot, in which you en- gage in behavior without considering its ethical undertones. Remember that technological advancements in the detection of cheating increase the probability of getting caught.

2. If you score high on certain traits that predispose you to cheat, this does not mean you are destined to cheat. However, you should realize that you may be more susceptible and therefore need to avoid certain envi- ronments, especially unethical ones.

Sources: M. J. Cooper, and C. Pullig, “I’m Number One! Does Narcissism Impair Ethi- cal Judgment Even for the Highly Religious?” Journal of Business Ethics 112 (2013): 167–76; H. E. Hershfield, T. R. Cohen, and L. Thompson, “Short Horizons and Tempting Situations: Lack of Continuity to our Future Selves Leads to Unethical Decision Making and Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 117 (2012): 298–310; C. H. Hsiao, “Impact of Ethical and Affective Variables on Cheating: Com- parison of Undergraduate Students with and without Jobs,” Higher Education 69, no. 1 (2015): 55–77; M. Carmichael, “Secret E- mail Searches on Harvard Cheating Scandal Broader Than Initially Described,” Boston Globe (April 2, 2013), www.boston .com/ metrodesk/2013/04/02/secret-mail - searches-harvard-cheating-scandal-broader- than-initially-described/Mgz0mc8hSk3IgW GjxLwsJP/story.html; P. E. Mudrack, J. M. Bloodgood, and W. H. Turnley, “Some Ethical Implications of Individual Competitiveness,” Journal of Business Ethics 108 (2012): 347– 59; and R. Pérez-Peña, “Studies Find More Students Cheating, with High Achievers No Exception,” The New York Times, September 8, 2012, A13.

Do You Have a cheating Personality? an ethical choice

Though it is fascinating to think about generational values, remember these classifications lack solid research support. Early research was plagued by meth- odological problems that made it difficult to assess whether differences actually exist. Reviews suggest many of the generalizations are either overblown or incor- rect.90 Differences across generations often do not support popular concep- tions of how generations differ. For example, the value placed on leisure has increased over generations from the baby boomers to the Millennials and work centrality has declined, but research did not find that Millennials had more altruistic work values.91 Generational classifications may help us understand our own and other generations better, but we must also appreciate their limits.

Linking an Individual’s Personality and Values to the Workplace Thirty years ago, organizations were concerned with personality in order to match individuals to specific jobs. That concern has expanded to include how well the individual’s personality and values match the organization. Why? Because managers today are less interested in an applicant’s ability to perform a specific job than with his or her flexibility to meet changing situations and maintain com- mitment to the organization. Still, one of the first types of fit managers look for is person–job fit.

5-6 Describe the differences between person–job fit and person–organization fit.

154 PART 2 The Individual

person–Job fit The effort to match job requirements with personality characteristics is described by John Holland’s personality–job fit theory, one of the more proven theories in use internationally.92 The Vocational Preference Inventory questionnaire contains 160 occupational titles. Respondents indicate which they like or dislike, and their answers form personality profiles. Holland pre- sented six personality types and proposed that satisfaction and the propensity to leave a position depend on how well individuals match their personalities to a job. Exhibit 5-5 describes the six types, their personality characteristics, and examples of the congruent occupations for each.

There are cultural implications for person–job fit that speak to workers’ expectations that jobs will be tailored. In individualistic countries where work- ers expect to be heard and respected by management, increasing person–job fit by tailoring the job to the person increases the individual’s job satisfaction. However, in collectivistic countries, person–job fit is a weaker predictor of job satisfaction because people do not expect to have a job tailored to them, so they value person–job fit efforts less. Therefore, managers in collectivistic cul- tures should not violate cultural norms by designing jobs for individuals; rather they should seek people who will likely thrive in jobs that have already been structured.93

person–organization fit We’ve noted that researchers have looked at matching people to organizations and jobs. If an organization has a dynamic and changing environment and needs employees able to readily change tasks and move easily between teams, it’s more important that employees’ personalities fit with the overall organization’s culture than with the characteristics of any specific job.

Person–organization fit essentially means people are attracted to and selected by organizations that match their values, and they leave organiza- tions that are not compatible with their personalities.94 Using the Big Five ter- minology, for instance, we could expect that extraverts fit well with aggressive and team-oriented cultures, people high on agreeableness match up better with a supportive organizational climate, and highly open people fit better

personality–job fit theory a theory that identifies six personality types and proposes that the fit between personality type and occupational environment determines satisfaction and turnover.

person–organization fit a theory that people are attracted to and selected by organizations that match their values, and leave when there is not compatibility.

Holland’s typology of personality and congruent occupationsExhibit 5-5

Type Personality Characteristics Congruent Occupations

Realistic: Prefers physical activities that Shy, genuine, persistent, stable, conforming, Mechanic, drill press operator, require skill, strength, and coordination practical assembly-line worker, farmer

Investigative: Prefers activities that involve Analytical, original, curious, independent Biologist, economist, mathematician, thinking, organizing, and understanding news reporter

Social: Prefers activities that involve Sociable, friendly, cooperative, understanding Social worker, teacher, counselor, helping and developing others clinical psychologist

Conventional: Prefers rule-regulated, Conforming, efficient, practical, unimaginative, Accountant, corporate manager, bank orderly, and unambiguous activities inflexible teller, file clerk

Enterprising: Prefers verbal activities Self-confident, ambitious, energetic, Lawyer, real estate agent, public in which there are opportunities to domineering relations specialist, small business influence others and attain power manager

Artistic: Prefers ambiguous and Imaginative, disorderly, idealistic, emotional, Painter, musician, writer, interior unsystematic activities that allow impractical decorator creative expression

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 155

Person–organization fit is important to Sheila Marcelo, founder and CEO of Care.com, an online sitter and care service. Marcelo seeks to hire employees who share the company’s culture of helping others and who are passionate about working on projects that achieve Care.com’s mission of improving the lives of families and caregivers. Source: Kelvin Ma/Bloomberg/Getty Images

in organizations that emphasize innovation rather than standardization.95 Following these guidelines when hiring should yield employees who fit bet- ter with the organization’s culture, which should, in turn, result in higher employee satisfaction and reduced turnover. Research on person–organiza- tion fit has also looked at whether people’s values match the organization’s culture. A match predicts job satisfaction, commitment to the organization, and low turnover.96

It is more important than ever for organizations to manage their image online since job seekers view company websites as part of their pre-application process. Applicants want to see a user-friendly website that provides informa- tion about company philosophies and policies. For example, Millennials in par- ticular may react positively when they perceive an organization is committed to work-life balance. The website is so important to the development of perceived person–organization fit that improvements to its style (usability) and substance (policies) can lead to more applicants.97

other Dimensions of fit Although person–job fit and person–organization fit are considered the most salient dimensions for workplace outcomes, other avenues of fit are worth exam- ining. These include person–group fit and person–supervisor fit. Person–group fit is important in team settings, where the dynamics of team interactions signifi- cantly affect work outcomes. Person–supervisor fit has become an important area of research since poor fit in this dimension can lead to lower job satisfac- tion and reduced performance.

All dimensions of fit are sometimes broadly referred to as person–environment fit. Each dimension can predict work attitudes, which are partially based on cul- ture. A recent meta-analysis of person–environment fit in East Asia, Europe, and North America suggested the dimensions of person–organization and person–job fit are the strongest predictors of positive work attitudes and performance in North America. These dimensions are important to a lesser degree in Europe, and they are the least important in East Asia.98

156 PART 2 The Individual

Cultural Values Unlike personality, which is largely genetically determined, values are learned. They are passed down through generations and vary by cultures. As researchers have sought to understand cultural value differences, two important frameworks that have emerged are from Geert Hofstede and the GLOBE studies.

Hofstede’s framework One of the most widely referenced approaches for analyzing variations among cultures was done in the late 1970s by Geert Hofstede.99 Hofstede surveyed more than 116,000 IBM employees in 40 countries about their work-related values and found managers and employees varied on five value dimensions of national culture:

• Power distance. Power distance describes the degree to which people in a country accept that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally. A high rating on power distance means large inequalities of power and wealth exist and are tolerated in the culture, as in a class or caste system that discourages upward mobility. A low power distance rating characterizes societies that stress equality and opportunity.

• Individualism versus collectivism. Individualism is the degree to which people prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups and believe in an individual’s rights above all else. Collectivism emphasizes a tight social framework in which people expect others in groups of which they are a part to look after them and protect them.

• Masculinity versus femininity. Hofstede’s construct of masculinity is the degree to which the culture favors traditional masculine roles such as achievement, power, and control, as opposed to viewing men and women as equals. A high masculinity rating indicates the culture has separate roles for men and women, with men dominating the society. A high femininity rating means the culture sees little differentiation between male and female roles and treats women as the equals of men in all respects.

• Uncertainty avoidance. The degree to which people in a country prefer structured over unstructured situations defines their uncertainty avoidance. In cultures scoring high on uncertainty avoidance, people have increased anxiety about uncertainty and ambiguity and use laws and controls to reduce uncertainty. People in cultures low on uncertainty avoidance are more accepting of ambiguity, are less rule oriented, take more risks, and more readily accept change.

• Long-term versus short-term orientation. This typology measures a society’s devotion to traditional values. People in a culture with long-term orientation look to the future and value thrift, persistence, and tradition. In a short-term orientation, people value the here and now; they also accept change more readily and don’t see commitments as impediments to change.

How do different countries score on Hofstede’s dimensions? Exhibit 5-6 shows the ratings of the countries for which data are available. For example, power distance is higher in Malaysia than in any other country. The United States is very individualistic; in fact, it’s the most individualistic nation of all (closely followed by Australia and Great Britain). Guatemala is the most collec- tivistic nation. The country with the highest masculinity rank by far is Japan, and

5-7 Compare Hofstede’s five value dimensions and the GloBe framework.

power distance a national culture attribute that describes the extent to which a society accepts that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally.

individualism a national culture attribute that describes the degree to which people prefer to act as individuals rather than as members of groups.

collectivism a national culture attribute that describes a tight social framework in which people expect others in groups of which they are a part to look after them and protect them.

masculinity a national culture attribute that describes the extent to which the culture favors traditional masculine work roles of achievement, power, and control. societal values are characterized by assertiveness and materialism.

femininity a national culture attribute that indicates little differentiation between male and female roles; a high rating indicates that women are treated as the equals of men in all aspects of the society.

uncertainty avoidance a national culture attribute that describes the extent to which a society feels threatened by uncertain and ambiguous situations and tries to avoid them.

long-term orientation a national culture attribute that emphasizes the future, thrift, and persistence.

short-term orientation a national culture attribute that emphasizes the present and accepts change.

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 157

Scores range from 0 = extremely low on dimension to 100 = extremely high.

Note: 1 = highest rank. LTO ranks: 1 = China; 15–16 = Bangladesh; 21 = Poland; 34 = lowest.

Source: Geert Hofstede, Gert Jan Hofstede, Michael Minkov, “Cultures and Organizations, Software of the Mind”, Third Revised Edition, McGrawHill 2010, ISBN 0-07-166418-1. © Geert Hofstede B.V.

quoted with permission.

Power Distance Individualism versus Collectivism

Masculinity versus Femininity

Uncertainty Avoidance

Long- versus Short-Term Orientation

Country Index Rank Index Rank Index Rank Index Rank Index Rank

Argentina 49 35–36 46 22–23 56 20–21 86 10–15 Australia 36 41 90 2 61 16 51 37 31 22–24 Austria 11 53 55 18 79 2 70 24–25 31 22–24 Belgium 65 20 75 8 54 22 94 5–6 38 18 Brazil 69 14 38 26–27 49 27 76 21–22 65 6 Canada 39 39 80 4–5 52 24 48 41–42 23 30 Chile 63 24–25 23 38 28 46 86 10–15 Colombia 67 17 13 49 64 11–12 80 20 Costa Rica 35 42–44 15 46 21 48–49 86 10–15 Denmark 18 51 74 9 16 50 23 51 46 10 Ecuador 78 8–9 8 52 63 13–14 67 28 El Salvador 66 18–19 19 42 40 40 94 5–6 Finland 33 46 63 17 26 47 59 31–32 41 14 France 68 15–16 71 10–11 43 35–36 86 10–15 39 17 Germany 35 42–44 67 15 66 9–10 65 29 31 22–24 Great Britain 35 42–44 89 3 66 9–10 35 47–48 25 28–29 Greece 60 27–28 35 30 57 18–19 112 1 Guatemala 95 2–3 6 53 37 43 101 3 Hong Kong 68 15–16 25 37 57 18–19 29 49–50 96 2 India 77 10–11 48 21 56 20–21 40 45 61 7 Indonesia 78 8–9 14 47–48 46 30–31 48 41–42 Iran 58 29–30 41 24 43 35–36 59 31–32 Ireland 28 49 70 12 68 7–8 35 47–48 43 13 Israel 13 52 54 19 47 29 81 19 Italy 50 34 76 7 70 4–5 75 23 34 19 Jamaica 45 37 39 25 68 7–8 13 52 Japan 54 33 46 22–23 95 1 92 7 80 4 Korea (South) 60 27–28 18 43 39 41 85 16–17 75 5 Malaysia 104 1 26 36 50 25–26 36 46 Mexico 81 5–6 30 32 69 6 82 18 The Netherlands 38 40 80 4–5 14 51 53 35 44 11–12 New Zealand 22 50 79 6 58 17 49 39–40 30 25–26 Norway 31 47–48 69 13 8 52 50 38 44 11–12 Pakistan 55 32 14 47–48 50 25–26 70 24–25 0 34 Panama 95 2–3 11 51 44 34 86 10–15 Peru 64 21–23 16 45 42 37–38 87 9 Philippines 94 4 32 31 64 11–12 44 44 19 31–32 Portugal 63 24–25 27 33–35 31 45 104 2 30 25–26 Singapore 74 13 20 39–41 48 28 8 53 48 9 South Africa 49 35–36 65 16 63 13–14 49 39–40 Spain 57 31 51 20 42 37–38 86 10–15 19 31–32 Sweden 31 47–48 71 10–11 5 53 29 49–50 33 20 Switzerland 34 45 68 14 70 4–5 58 33 40 15–16 Taiwan 58 29–30 17 44 45 32–33 69 26 87 3 Thailand 64 21–23 20 39–41 34 44 64 30 56 8 Turkey 66 18–19 37 28 45 32–33 85 16–17 United States 40 38 91 1 62 15 46 43 29 27 Uruguay 61 26 36 29 38 42 100 4 Venezuela 81 5–6 12 50 73 3 76 21–22 Yugoslavia 76 12 27 33–35 21 48–49 88 8 Regions: Arab countries 80 7 38 26–27 53 23 68 27 East Africa 64 21–23 27 33–35 41 39 52 36 25 28–29 West Africa 77 10–11 20 39–41 46 30–31 54 34 16 33

Hofstede’s cultural Values by nationExhibit 5-6

158 PART 2 The Individual

the country with the highest femininity rank is Sweden. Greece scores the high- est in uncertainty avoidance, while Singapore scores the lowest. Hong Kong has one of the longest-term orientations; Pakistan has the shortest-term orientation.

Research across 598 studies with more than 200,000 respondents has inves- tigated the relationship of Hofstede’s cultural values and a variety of organiza- tional criteria at both the individual and national level of analysis.100 Overall, the five original culture dimensions were found to be equally strong predictors of relevant outcomes. The researchers also found measuring individual scores resulted in much better predictions of most outcomes than assigning all people in a country the same cultural values. In sum, this research suggests Hofstede’s framework may be a valuable way of thinking about differences among people, but we should be cautious about assuming all people from a country have the same values.

the GloBe framework Begun in 1993, the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) research program is an ongoing cross-cultural inves- tigation of leadership and national culture. Using data from 825 organiza- tions in 62 countries, the GLOBE team identified nine dimensions on which national cultures differ.101 Some dimensions—such as power distance, indi- vidualism/collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, gender differentiation (similar to masculinity versus femininity), and future orientation (similar to long-term versus short-term orientation)—resemble the Hofstede dimensions. The main difference is that the GLOBE framework added dimensions, such as humane orientation (the degree to which a society rewards individuals for being altru- istic, generous, and kind to others) and performance orientation (the degree

According to Hofstede’s framework, many Asian countries have a strong collectivist culture that fosters a team-based approach to work. These employees in a department store out- let in Busan, South Korea, are likely to consider the success of their team as more important than personal suc- cess on the job. Source: Yonhap News/YNA/Newscom

Personality and  Values CHAPTER 5 159

to which a society encourages and rewards group members for performance improvement and excellence).

comparison of Hofstede’s framework and the GloBe framework Which framework is better, Hofstede’s or the GLOBE? That’s hard to say, and each has its supporters. We give more emphasis to Hofstede’s dimensions here because they have stood the test of time and the GLOBE study confirmed them. For example, a review of the organizational commitment literature shows both the Hofstede and GLOBE individualism/collectivism dimensions operated simi- larly. Specifically, both frameworks showed organizational commitment tends to be lower in individualistic countries.102 Both frameworks have a great deal in com- mon, and each has something to offer.

Summary Personality matters to organizational behavior. It does not explain all behavior, but it sets the stage. Emerging theory and research reveal how personality mat- ters more in some situations than others. The Big Five has been a particularly important advancement, though the Dark Triad and other traits matter as well. Every trait has advantages and disadvantages for work behavior, and there is no perfect constellation of traits that is ideal in every situation. Personality can help you to understand why people (including yourself!) act, think, and feel the way we do, and the astute manager can put that understanding to use by taking care to place employees in situations that best fit their personalities.

Values often underlie and explain attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions. Values tend to vary internationally along dimensions that can predict organi- zational outcomes; however, an individual may or may not hold values that are consistent with the values of the national culture.

Implications for Managers ●● Consider screening job candidates for conscientiousness—and the other

Big Five traits, depending on the criteria your organization finds most important. Other aspects, such as core self-evaluation or narcissism, may be relevant in certain situations.

●● Although the MBTI has faults, you can use it in training and development to help employees better understand each other, open up communica- tion in workgroups, and possibly reduce conflicts.

●● Evaluate jobs, workgroups, and your organization to determine the opti- mal personality fit.

●● Take into account situational factors when evaluating observable person- ality traits, and lower the situation strength to better ascertain personality characteristics.

●● The more you consider people’s different cultures, the better you will be able to determine their work behavior and create a positive organizational climate that performs well.

160 PART 2 The Individual

Millennials are More narcissistic than their Parents

M illennials have some great virtues: as a group, they are tech-nologically savvy, socially tolerant, and engaged. They value their quality of life as equal to their career, seeking a bal- ance between home and work. In these ways, millennials surpass their baby boomer parents, who are less technologically adept, less toler- ant, more localized, and who have a history of striving to get ahead at all costs. However, millennials have a big achilles’ heel—they are more narcissistic.

several large-scale, longitudinal studies found millennials are more likely than baby boomers to have seemingly inflated views of themselves, and psychologists have found narcissism has been grow- ing since the early 1980s. more millennials rate themselves as above average on attributes such as academic ability, leadership, public speaking ability, and writing ability. millennials are also more likely to agree they would be “very good” spouses (56 percent, compared to 37 percent among 1980 graduates), parents (54 percent; 36 percent for 1980 graduates), and workers (65 percent; 49 percent for 1980 graduates).

Cliff Zukin, a senior faculty fellow at rutgers University, believes the reason is in the childhood upbringing of millennials. “This is the most affirmed generation in history,” he said. “They were raised believing they could do anything they wanted to, and that they have skills and talents to bring to a job setting.” Jean m. Twenge, author of Generation Me, agrees. “People were not saying, ‘Believe in yourself’ and ‘you are special’ in the ‘60s.”

narcissism is bad for society, and particularly bad for the work place. “[narcissists] tend to be very self-absorbed; they value fun in their personal and their work life,” one administrator said. “I can’t ex- pect them to work on one project for any amount of time without getting bored.”

PoInt

W asn’t “The me Generation” generations ago? Honestly, every generation thinks they are better than the ones that come after! “you can find complaints [about the younger genera- tion] in Greek literature, in the Bible,” Professor Cappelli of the Whar- ton school observed. “There’s no evidence millennials are different. They’re just younger.” While millennials are the 20-somethings of today, what is universally true is that young people share certain characteris- tics . . . because they are young.

a recent study shows the similarity between how millennials and baby boomers thought about themselves at the same stage of life. as college freshmen, 71 percent of millennials thought they were above average academically, and 63 percent of baby boomers thought the same thing when they were college freshmen. similarly, 77 percent of millennials believed they were above average in the drive to achieve, versus 68 percent for baby boomers. In other words, “every generation is Generation me.”

In some ways, millennials may be less narcissistic than baby boomers today. as one manager observed, “[millennials] don’t have that line between work and home that used to exist, so they’re do- ing Facebook for the company at night, on saturday or sunday. We get incredible productivity out of them.” millennials also may be more altruistic. For example, 29 percent of millennials believe individuals have a responsibility to remain involved in issues and causes for the good of all, while only 24 percent of baby boomers feel the same level of responsibility.

rather than comparing different generations, it is more accurate to compare people at one life stage with others at the same life stage. research supports that people in their 20s tend to be more narcis- sistic than people in their 50s. since millennials are in their 20s, and many of their parents are in their 50s, millennials are no more narcis- sistic than baby boomers were in their youth.

CounteRPoInt

Sources: J. m. Twenge, W. K. Campbell, and e. C. Freeman, “Generational Differences in young adults’ life Goals, Concern for others, and Civic orientation, 1966–2009,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 1045–62; m. Hartman, “millennials at Work: young and Callow, like Their Parents,” The New York Times, march 25, 2014, F4; J. Jin and J. rounds, “stability and Change in Work values: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 80 (2012): 326–39; C. lourosa-ricardo, “How america Gives,” The Wall Street Journal, December 15, 2014, r3; “millennials rule,” The New York Times Education Life, april 12, 2015, 4; G. ruffenach, “a Generational Gap: Giving to Charity,” The Wall Street Journal, January 20, 2015, r4; and s. W. lester, r. l. standifer, n. J. schultz, and J. m. Windsor, “actual versus Perceived Generational Differences at Work: an empirical examination,” Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 19 (2012): 341–54.

Personality and Values CHAPTER 5 161

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

cHaPter revieW

QuestiOns FOr revieW

5-1 What is personality? How do we typically measure it? What factors determine personality?

5-2 What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and the Big Five per- sonality model?

5-3 How do the concepts of core self-evaluation (CSE), self-monitoring, and proactive personality help us to understand personality?

5-4 How does the situation or environment affect the degree to which personality predicts behavior?

5-5 What is the difference between terminal and instrumental values?

5-6 What are the differences between person–job fit and person–organization fit?

5-7 How do Hofstede’s five value dimensions and the GLOBE framework differ?

exPerientiaL exercise Your Best Self The object of this game is to end up with the labels that best represent each person’s values. The following rows represent 11 rounds of play. Break the class into groups of four students (if the number of students is not divis- ible by four, then we suggest three). Play begins with the person in the group whose name comes first in alpha- betical order. That student picks one of the values in round one that represents him- or herself, crosses it off this list, and writes it down on a piece of paper. Values can be used by only one person at a time. Moving clock- wise, the next person does the same, and so forth for round one until all the values have been taken.

For round two, the first player can either add a sec- ond value from the round two row, or take a value from one of the other players by adding it to his or her list while the other player crosses off the value. The player whose value has been taken selects two new values from the one and two rows. Play proceeds clockwise.

The rest of the rounds continue the same way, with a new row available for each round. At the end of the rounds, students rank the importance to them of the values they have accumulated.

1. Freedom Integrity Spirituality Respect 2. Loyalty Achievement Fidelity Exploration 3. Affection Challenge Serenity Justice 4. Charity Discipline Security Mastery 5. Prudence Diversity Kindness Duty 6. Wisdom Inspiration Harmony Joy 7. Depth Compassion Excellence Tolerance 8. Honesty Success Growth Modesty 9. Courage Dedication Empathy Openness

10. Faith Service Playfulness Learning 11. Discovery Independence Humor Understanding

Questions for class discussion: 5-8. What are your top three values? How well do they

represent you? Did you feel pressure to choose val- ues that might seem most socially acceptable?

5-9. Is there a value you would claim for yourself that is not on the list?

5-10. It is often argued that values are meaningful only when they conflict and we have to choose between them. Do you think that was one of the objectives of this game? Do you agree with the premise?

162 PART 2 The Individual

etHicaL DiLeMMa Millennial Job Hopping Those who have been in the workforce for many years of- ten lament the job hopping of more recent entrants into the workforce. In their mindset, leaving an employer is not something to do lightly since employers invest money and effort into employees. Many see job hopping as a breach of an ethical understanding between employer and em- ployee. Is it?

Lifelong commitment to one employer is a thing of the past. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that today, only 28 percent of women and 30 percent of men remain with their employer for 10 or more years, compared to 50 percent for both men and women in 1973. Compensa- tion research firm PayScale found the average Millennial changes jobs every 2 years.

While the data may represent an upswing in job hop- ping, some of this movement is employer-driven. Some say that since lifetime job security and benefit packages such as rock-solid pensions and perpetual health benefits are long gone for most positions, employers have broken the ethical reciprocal relationship.

Some say the ethics of staying with an organization have dissolved. They argue Millennials have changed the em- ployer-employee relationship because they emphasize the present over the future and place a great value on daily lifestyle. Similarly, some argue that, rather than career planning and promises of long-term career prospects, Mil- lennials need more feedback and reassurance in order to feel they should stay with an organization.

The ethics of the situation may come down to expec- tations and perceived fairness. The data show the differ- ences in expectations: 66 percent of Millennials say they want to switch careers at some time in their life, while 62 percent of Generation X members and 84 percent of baby

boomers say they would prefer to stay at their current job for the rest of their lives. Andrew Leavitt, a 26-year-old who changed jobs a year after graduating college, said, “I mean, what kind of Millennial would work for the same company for their whole life?” Millennials seem to prefer no ethical obligation to stay with an employer, but expect an obligation for the employer to stay with them. Accord- ing to Neil Howe, the individual credited with coining the term Millennial generation, Millennials expect “the perfect employer who will be their ally and take care of them.”

This type of situation—where employers give employees what they want, but employees aren’t ethically obligated to stay—doesn’t sit well with many employers. “We prefer long-tenured employees who have stuck with us and been loyal,” says Dave Foster, CEO of AvreaFoster, an advertis- ing agency in Dallas. “It appears that a lot of Millennials don’t think that one path is the answer. This is a problem because the commitment isn’t there.” No matter what the difference in values, it seems Millennials and organizations need to decide the ethical expectations for the modern employment relationship.

Questions 5-11. In your experience, do younger individuals differ

from older individuals in terms of how long they plan to remain with a given employer?

5-12. Do you think you should feel free to “job surf”— purposely move from job to job as soon as the desire strikes? Do you think employers have a right to ask about “job surfing” plans when they interview you?

5-13. If you had an interview with Foster or someone with his views of Millennials, how might you com- bat his preconceptions?

Sources: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employee Tenure Summary, September 14, 2014, U.S. Depart- ment of Labor, www.bls.gov/news.release/tenure.nr0.htm; T. Hsu, “Millennials Change Jobs Every 2  Years on Average,” Chicago Tribune, September 3, 2012, 2-1; L. Kwoh, “Firms Bow to Genera- tion Y’s Demands,” The Wall Street Journal, August 22, 2012, B6; E. Frauenheim, “Deal or No Deal? ‘Employee Value Proposition’ Evolves,” Workforce Management (November 2012): 16–17; T. S. Collins, “ Millennials Take on the Workforce,” SHIFT Magazine, May 3, 2011, downloaded April 29, 2013, from www.smudailymustang.com; and T. Henneman, “Talkin’ about Their Generations: The Workforce of the ‘50s and Today,” Workforce Management (April 2012): 24–25.

case inciDent 1 On the Costs of Being Nice Agreeable people tend to be kinder and more accommo- dating in social situations, which you might think could add to their success in life. However, one downside of agreeableness is potentially lower earnings. Research has shown the answer to this and other puzzles; some of them may surprise you.

First, and perhaps most obvious, agreeable individu- als are less adept at a type of negotiation called distribu- tive bargaining. As we discuss in Chapter 14, distributive

bargaining is less about creating win–win solutions and more about claiming as large a share of the pie as pos- sible. Because salary negotiations are generally distribu- tive, agreeable individuals often negotiate lower salaries for themselves than they might otherwise get.

Second, agreeable individuals may choose to work in industries or occupations that earn lower salaries, such as the “caring” industries of education and health care. Agreeable individuals are also attracted to jobs both in the

Personality and Values CHAPTER 5 163

public sector and in nonprofit organizations. Third, the earnings of agreeable individuals also may be reduced by their lower drive to emerge as leaders and by their tenden- cy to engage in lower degrees of proactive task behaviors, such as coming up with ways to increase organizational effectiveness.

While being agreeable certainly doesn’t appear to help your paycheck, it does provide other benefits. Agreeable individuals are better liked at work, more likely to help others at work, and generally happier at work and in life.

Nice guys and gals may finish last in terms of earnings, but wages do not define a happy life, and on that front, agreeable individuals have the advantage.

Questions 5-14. Do you think employers must choose between

agreeable employees and top performers? Why or why not?

5-15. Often, the effects of personality depend on the situation. Can you think of some job situations in which agreeableness is an important virtue, and some in which it is harmful to job performance?

5-16. In some research we’ve conducted, the negative effect of agreeableness on earnings has been stron- ger for men than for women (that is, being agree- able hurt men’s earnings more than women’s). Why do you think this might be the case?

Sources: T. A. Judge, B. A. Livingston, and C. Hurst, “Do Nice Guys—and Gals—Really Finish Last? The Joint Effects of Sex and Agreeableness on Income,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 390–407; J. B. Bernerth, S. G. Taylor, H. J. Walker, and D. S. Whitman, “An Empirical Investigation of Dispositional Antecedents and Performance-Related Outcomes of Credit Scores,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012): 469–78; J. Carpenter, D. Doverspike, and R. F. Miguel, “Public Service Motivation as a Predictor of Attraction to the Public Sector,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 80 (2012): 509–23; and A. Neal, G. Yeo, A. Koy, and T. Xiao, “Predicting the Form and Direction of Work Role Performance from the Big 5 Model of Personality Traits,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 33 (2012): 175–92.

case inciDent 2 The Power of Quiet If someone labeled you an “introvert” how would it make you feel?

Judging from research on social desirability, most of us would prefer to be labeled extraverts. Normal distributions being what they are, however, half the world is more intro- verted than average. Earlier in the chapter we discussed the upside of introversion, but in many ways, it’s an extravert’s world. So says Susan Cain in her bestselling book Quiet.

Cain makes three arguments:

1. We see ourselves as extraverts. Introversion is generally seen as undesirable, partly because extraverts like being in charge and are more apt to shape environments to fit their wishes. “Many of the most important institutions of contemporary life are designed for those who enjoy group projects and high levels of stimulation.”

2. Introversion is driven underground. Thanks to social norms and structures, introverts often are forced to be “closet introverts”—acting according to an extraverted ideal, even if that is not their personality at heart. Think about it. If someone comments, “You’re awfully quiet,” they nearly always assume an underlying problem, as if not being quiet is the norm.

3. Extraversion is not all it’s cracked up to be. Because introversion is suppressed, we cause the introverts of the world distress and fail to capitalize on the many virtues of

introversion. We may overlook the quiet, thoughtful in- trovert when choosing a leader, we may quell creativity by doing most of our work in groups, and we may mistake appearance for reality (“Don’t mistake assertiveness or eloquence for good ideas,” Cain writes). Society may un- wittingly push people to take risks more than is warrant- ed, to act before they think, and to focus on short-term rewards above all else. Introverts prefer quiet conditions to concentrate on difficult tasks.

Cain is not anti-extravert. She simply thinks we should en- courage people to be who they truly are, and that means valu- ing extraversion and introversion. Research indicates happy introverts are every bit as happy as happy extraverts. Cain concludes, “The next time you see a person with a composed face and soft voice, remember that inside her mind she might be solving an equation, composing a sonnet, designing a hat. She might, that is, be deploying the powers of quiet.”

Questions 5-17. Would you classify yourself as introverted or

extraverted? How would people who know you describe you?

5-18. Would you prefer to be more introverted, or more extraverted, than you are? Why?

5-19. Do you agree with Cain’s arguments? Why or why not?

Source: Based on S. Cain, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking (New York: Random House/Broadway Paperbacks, 2013); G. Belojevic; V. Slepcevic, and B. Jakovljevic, “Men- tal Performance in Noise: The Role of Introversion,” Journal of Environmental Psychology 21, no. 2 (2001): 209–13; and P. Hills and M. Argyle, “Happiness, Introversion-Extraversion and Happy Intro- verts,” Personality and Individual Differences 30, no. 4 (2001): 595–608.

164 PART 2 The Individual

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

5-20. What do you feel are the pros and cons of extraversion and introversion for your work life? Can you increase desirable traits?

5-21. The study cited in the Ethical Dilemma found that Millennials change jobs every 2 years, while for baby boomers the average tenure was 7 years and for Generation X, 5. Because people change jobs less often as they age, do you think these statistics may have more to do with age than with generational values? Why or why not?

5-22. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

enDnOtes 1 D. Leising, J. Scharloth, O. Lohse, and D. Wood, “What Types of Terms Do People Use When Describing an Individual’s Personality?” Psychological Science 25, no. 9 (2014): 1787–94. 2 L. Weber, “To Get a Job, New Hires Are Put to the Test,” The Wall Street Journal, April 15, 2015, A1, A10. 3 L. Weber and E. Dwoskin, “As Personality Tests Multiply, Employers Are Split,” The Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2014, A1, A10. 4 D. Belkin, “Colleges Put the Emphasis on Personality,” The Wall Street Journal, January 9, 2015, A3. 5 K. I. van der Zee, J. N. Zaal, and J. Piekstra, “Validation of the Multicultural Personality Questionnaire in the Context of Personnel Selection,” European Journal of Personality 17, Supl. 1 (2003): S77–S100. 6 S. A. Birkeland, T. M. Manson, J. L. Kisa- more, M. T. Brannick, and M. A. Smith, “A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Job Applicant Faking on Personality Measures,” International Journal of Selection and Assessment 14, no. 14 (2006): 317–35. 7 K. L. Cullen, W. A. Gentry, and F. J. Yam- mamarino, “Biased Self-Perception Tenden- cies: Self-Enhancement/Self-Diminishment and Leader Derailment in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 64, no. 1 (2015): 161–207. 8 D. H. Kluemper, B. D. McLarty, and M. N. Bing, “Acquaintance Ratings of the Big Five Personality Traits: Incremental Validity Beyond and Interac- tive Effects with Self-Reports in the Prediction of Workplace Deviance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 237–48; I. Oh, G. Wang, and M. K. Mount, “Validity of Observer Ratings of the Five-Factor Model of Personality Traits: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 96, no. 4 (2011): 762–73. 9 S. Srivastava, O. P. John, and S. D. Gosling, “Development of Personality in Early and Middle Adulthood: Set Like Plaster or Persis- tent Change?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84, no. 5 (2003): 1041–53; and B. W. Roberts, K. E. Walton, and W. Viechtbauer, “Patterns of Mean-Level Change in Personality Traits across the Life Course: A Meta-Analysis

of Longitudinal Studies,” Psychological Bulletin 132, no. 1 (2006): 1–25. 10 S. E. Hampson and L. R. Goldberg, “A First Large Cohort Study of Personality Trait Stabil- ity Over the 40 Years between Elementary School and Midlife,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91, no. 4 (2006): 763–79. 11 L. R. James and M. D. Mazerolle, Personality in Work Organizations (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002); and B. W. Roberts and D. Mroc- zek, “Personality Trait Change in Adulthood,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 17, no. 1 (2008): 31–35. 12 R. B. Kennedy and D. A. Kennedy, “Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in Career Counseling,” Journal of Employment Counseling 41, no. 1 (2004): 38–44. 13 The Myers & Briggs Foundation, “How Fre- quent Is My Type?” http://www.myersbriggs .org/my-mbti-personality-type/my-mbti- results/how-frequent-is-my-type.asp, accessed April 24, 2015. 14 A. Grant, “Goodbye to MBTI, the Fad That Won’t Die,” Huffington Post, (September 17, 2013), http://www.huffingtonpost .com/adam-grant/goodbye-to-mbti-the-fad- t_b_3947014.html. 15 See, for instance, D. J. Pittenger, “Cautionary Comments Regarding the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator,” Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 57, no. 3 (2005): 10–221; L. Bess and R. J. Harvey, “Bimodal Score Distributions and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: Fact or Artifact?” Journal of Personality Assessment 78, no. 1 (2002): 176–86; R. M. Capraro and M. M. Capraro, “Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Score Reliability across Studies: A Meta-Analytic Reliability Generalization Study,” Educational & Psychological Measurement 62, no. 4 (2002): 590–602; and R. C. Arnau, B. A. Green, D. H. Rosen, D. H. Gleaves, and J. G. Melancon, “Are Jungian Preferences Really Categorical? An Empirical Investigation Using Taxometric Analysis,” Personality & Individual Differences 34, no. 2 (2003): 233–51. 16 D. Ariely, “When Lame Pick-Up Lines Actu- ally Work,” The Wall Street Journal, July 19–20, 2014, C12.

17 See, for example, Oh, Wang, and Mount, “Validity of Observer Ratings of the Five- Factor Model of Personality Traits: A Meta- Analysis”; and M. R. Barrick and M. K. Mount, “Yes, Personality Matters: Moving On to More Important Matters,” Human Performance 18, no. 4 (2005): 359–72. 18 W. Fleeson and P. Gallagher, “The Implica- tions of Big Five Standing for the Distribution of Trait Manifestation in Behavior: Fifteen Experience-Sampling Studies and a Meta-Analy- sis,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, no. 6 (2009): 1097–114. 19 T. A. Judge, L. S. Simon, C. Hurst, and K. Kelley, “What I Experienced Yesterday Is Who I Am Today: Relationship of Work Motivations and Behaviors to Within-Individual Variation in the Five-Factor Model of Personality,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 2 (2014): 199–221. 20 R. D. Zimmerman, W. R. Boswell, A. J. Shipp, B. B. Dunford, and J. W. Boudreau, “Explaining the Pathways between Approach- Avoidance Personality Traits and Employees’ Job Search Behavior,” Journal of Management 38, no. 5 (2012): 1450–75. 21 See, for instance, I. Oh and C. M. Berry, “The Five-Factor Model of Personality and Managerial Performance: Validity Gains through the Use of 360 Degree Perfor- mance Ratings,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 94, no. 6 (2009): 1498–513; J. Hogan and B. Holland, “Using Theory to Evaluate Personality and Job-Performance Relations: A Socioanalytic Perspective,” Journal of Ap- plied Psychology 88, no. 1 (2003): 100–12; and M. R. Barrick and M. K. Mount, “Select on Conscientiousness and Emotional Stability,” in E. A. Locke (ed.), Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior (Malden, MA: Black- well, 2004), 15–28. 22 P. R. Sackett and P. T. Walmsley, “Which Personality Attributes Are Most Important in the Workplace?” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 5 (2014): 538–51. 23 A. E. Poropat, “A Meta-Analysis of the Five- Factor Model of Personality and Academic Performance,” Psychological Bulletin 135, no. 2 (2009): 322–38.

Personality and Values CHAPTER 5 165

24 A. K. Nandkeolyar, J. A. Shaffer, A. Li, S. Ekkirala, and J. Bagger, “Surviving an Abusive Supervisor: The Joint Roles of Conscientious- ness and Coping Strategies,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 1 (2014): 138–50. 25 B. Wille, F. De Fruyt, and M. Feys, “Big Five Traits and Intrinsic Success in the New Career Era: A 15-Year Longitudinal Study on Employ- ability and Work-Family Conflict,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 62, no. 1 (2013): 124–56. 26 M. K. Shoss, K. Callison, and L. A. Witt, “The Effects of Other-Oriented Perfectionism and Conscientiousness on Helping at Work,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 64, no. 1 (2015): 233–51. 27 C. Robert and Y. H. Cheung, “An Exami- nation of the Relationship between Consci- entiousness and Group Performance on a Creative Task,” Journal of Research in Personality 44, no. 2 (2010): 222–31; and M. Batey, T. Chamorro-Premuzic, and A. Furnham, “Indi- vidual Differences in Ideational Behavior. Can the Big Five and Psychometric Intelligence Predict Creativity Scores?” Creativity Research Journal 22, no. 1 (2010): 90–97. 28 J. L. Huang, A. M. Ryan, K. L. Zabel, and A. Palmer, “Personality and Adaptive Perfor- mance at Work: A Meta-Analytic Investigation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 1 (2014): 162–79. 29 R. D. Zimmerman, W. R. Boswell, A. J. Shipp, B. B. Dunford, and J. W. Boudreau, “Explain- ing the Pathways between Approach-Avoidance Personality Traits and Employees’ Job Search Behavior,” Journal of Management 38, no. 5 (2012): 1450–75. 30 B. Wille, F. De Fruyt, and M. Feys, “Big Five Traits and Intrinsic Success in the New Career Era: A 15-Year Longitudinal Study on Employ- ability and Work-Family Conflict.” 31 R. J. Foti and M. A. Hauenstein, “Pattern and Variable Approaches in Leadership Emer- gence and Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 2 (2007): 347–55. 32 B. Weiss, and R. S. Feldman, “Looking Good and Lying to Do It: Deception as an Impression Management Strategy in Job Interviews,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36, no. 4 (2006): 1070–86. 33 A. Minbashian, J. Earl, and J. E. H. Bright, “Openness to Experience as a Predictor of Job Performance Trajectories,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 62, no. 1 (2013): 1–12. 34 B. Wille, F. De Fruyt, and M. Feys, “Big Five Traits and Intrinsic Success in the New Career Era: A 15-Year Longitudinal Study on Employ- ability and Work-Family Conflict.” 35 R. Ilies, I. S. Fulmer, M. Spitzmuller, and M. D. Johnson, “Personality and Citizenship Behavior: The Mediating Role of Job Satisfac- tion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 4 (2009): 945–59. 36 D. H. Kluemper, B. D. McLarty, and M. N. Bing, “Acquaintance Ratings of the Big Five Personality Traits: Incremental Validity

Beyond and Interactive Effects with Self- Reports in the Prediction of Workplace Devi- ance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 237–48. 37 S. Clarke and I. Robertson, “An Examina- tion of the Role of Personality in Accidents Using Meta-Analysis,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 57, no. 1 (2008): 94–108. 38 B. Wille, F. De Fruyt, and M. Feys, “Big Five Traits and Intrinsic Success in the New Career Era: A 15-Year Longitudinal Study on Employ- ability and Work-Family Conflict.” 39 See, for instance, S. Yamagata, A. Suzuki, J. Ando, Y. Ono, K. Yutaka, N. Kijima, et al., “Is the Genetic Structure of Human Personality Universal? A Cross-Cultural Twin Study from North America, Europe, and Asia,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90, no. 6 (2006): 987–98; and R. R. McCrae, P. T. Costa Jr., T. A. Martin, V. E. Oryol, A. A. Rukavishnikov, I. G. Senin, et al., “Consensual Validation of Person- ality Traits across Cultures,” Journal of Research in Personality 38, no. 2 (2004): 179–201. 40 M. Gurven, C. von Ruden, M. Massenkoff, H. Kaplan, and M. L. Vie, “How Universal Is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of Personality Variation among Forager-Farmers in the Bolivian Amazon,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104, no. 2 (2013): 354–70. 41 J. F. Rauthmann, “The Dark Triad and Interpersonal Perception: Similarities and Differences in the Social Consequences of Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and Psychopa- thy,” Social Psychological and Personality Science 3 (2012): 487–96. 42 P. D. Harms and S. M. Spain, “Beyond the Bright Side: Dark Personality at Work,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 64, no. 1 (2015): 15–24. 43 P. K. Jonason, S. Slomski, and J. Partyka, “The Dark Triad at Work: How Toxic Employ- ees Get Their Way,” Personality and Individual Differences 52 (2012): 449–53. 44 E. H. O’Boyle, D. R. Forsyth, G. C. Banks, and M. A. McDaniel, “A Meta-Analysis of the Dark Triad and Work Behavior: A Social Exchange Perspective,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012): 557–79. 45 L. Zhang, and M. A. Gowan, “Corporate Social Responsibility, Applicants’ Individual Traits, and Organizational Attraction: A Per- son–Organization Fit Perspective,” Journal of Business and Psychology 27 (2012): 345–62. 46 D. N. Hartog and F. D. Belschak, “Work En- gagement and Machiavellianism in the Ethical Leadership Process,” Journal of Business Ethics 107 (2012): 35–47. 47 E. Grijalva and P. D. Harms, “Narcissism: An Integrative Synthesis and Dominance Comple- mentarity Model” The Academy of Management Perspectives 28, no. 2 (2014): 108–27. 48 D. C. Maynard, E. M. Brondolo, C. E. Con- nelly, and C. E. Sauer, “I’m Too Good for This Job: Narcissism’s Role in the Experience of Overqualification,” Applied Psychology: An Inter- national Review 64, no. 1 (2015): 208–32.

49 E. Grijalva and P. D. Harms, “Narcissism: An Integrative Synthesis and Dominance Comple- mentarity Model.” 50 B. J. Brummel and K. N. Parker, “Obliga- tion and Entitlement in Society and the Workplace,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 64, no. 1 (2015): 127–60. 51 E. Grijalva and D. A. Newman, “Narcissism and Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB): Meta-Analysis and Consideration of Collectivist Culture, Big Five Personality, and Narcissism’s Facet Structure,” Applied Psychology: An Interna- tional Review 2015, 93–126. 52 D. C. Maynard, E. M. Brondolo, C. E. Con- nelly, and C. E. Sauer, “I’m Too Good for This Job: Narcissism’s Role in the Experience of Overqualification.” 53 E. Grijalva and P. D. Harms, “Narcissism: An Integrative Synthesis and Dominance Comple- mentarity Model.” 54 J. J. Sosik, J. U. Chun, and W. Zhu, “Hang On to Your Ego: The Moderating Role of Leader Narcissism on Relationships between Leader Charisma and Follower Psychological Empowerment and Moral Identity,” Journal of Business Ethics, February 12, 2013, and B. M. Galvin, D. A. Waldman, and P. Balthazard, “Vi- sionary Communication Qualities as Media- tors of the Relationship between Narcissism and Attributions of Leader Charisma,” Person- nel Psychology 63, no. 3 (2010): 509–37. 55 D. Meinert, “Narcissistic Bosses Aren’t All Bad, Study Finds,” HR Magazine, March 2014, 18. 56 K. A. Byrne and D. A. Worthy, “Do Narcis- sists Make Better Decisions? An Investigation of Narcissism and Dynamic Decision-Making Performance,” Personality and Individual Differ- ences, July 2013, 112–17. 57 C. Andreassen, H. Ursin, H. Eriksen, S. Pallesen, “The Relationship of Narcissism with Workaholism, Work Engagement, and Profes- sional Position,” Social Behavior and Personality 40, no. 6 (2012): 881–90. 58 A. Chatterjee and D. C. Hambrick, “Execu- tive Personality, Capability Cues, and Risk Taking: How Narcissistic CEOs React to Their Successes and Stumbles,” Administrative Science Quarterly 56 (2011): 202–37. 59 C. J. Resick, D. S. Whitman, S. M. Weingar- den, and N. J. Hiller, “The Bright-Side and Dark-Side of CEO Personality: Examining Core Self-Evaluations, Narcissism, Transforma- tional Leadership, and Strategic Influence,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 6 (2009): 1365–81. 60 O’Boyle, Forsyth, Banks, and McDaniel, “A Meta-Analysis of the Dark Triad and Work Be- havior: A Social Exchange Perspective,” 558. 61 B. Wille, F. De Fruyt, and B. De Clercq, “Expanding and Reconceptualizing Aberrant Personality at Work: Validity of Five-Factor Model Aberrant Personality Tendencies to Predict Career Outcomes,” Personnel Psychology 66 (2013): 173–223. 62 P. K. Jonason, S. Slomski, and J. Partyka, “The Dark Triad at Work: How Toxic

166 PART 2 The Individual

Employees Get Their Way,” Personality and In- dividual Differences 52 (2012): 449–53; and H. M. Baughman, S. Dearing, E. Giammarco, and P. A. Vernon, “Relationships between Bullying Behaviours and the Dark Triad: A Study with Adults,” Personality and Individual Differences 52 (2012): 571–75. 63 U. Orth and R. W. Robins, “Understand- ing the Link between Low Self-Esteem and Depression,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 22, no. 6 (2013): 455–60. 64 B. Wille, F. De Fruyt, and B. De Clercq, “Expanding and Reconceptualizing Aberrant Personality at Work: Validity of Five-Factor Model Aberrant Personality Tendencies to Predict Career Outcomes,” Personnel Psychology 66 (2013): 173–223. 65 T. A. Judge and J. E. Bono, “A Rose by Any Other Name … Are Self-Esteem, Generalized Self-Efficacy, Neuroticism, and Locus of Con- trol Indicators of a Common Construct?” in B. W. Roberts and R. Hogan (eds.), Personality Psychology in the Workplace (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2001), 93–118. 66 A. N. Salvaggio, B. Schneider, L. H. Nishi, D. M. Mayer, A. Ramesh, and J. S. Lyon, “Manager Personality, Manager Service Qual- ity Orientation, and Service Climate: Test of a Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 6 (2007): 1741–50; B. A. Scott and T. A. Judge, “The Popularity Contest at Work: Who Wins, Why, and What Do They Receive?” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 1 (2009): 20–33; and T. A. Judge and C. Hurst, “How the Rich (and Happy) Get Richer (and Hap- pier): Relationship of Core Self-Evaluations to Trajectories in Attaining Work Success,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 4 (2008): 849–63. 67 A. M. Grant and A. Wrzesniewksi, “I Won’t Let You Down … or Will I? Core Self- Evaluations, Other-Orientation, Anticipated Guilt and Gratitude, and Job Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 1 (2010): 108–21. 68 L. Parks-Leduc, M. W. Pattie, F. Pargas, and R. G. Eliason, “Self-Monitoring as an Aggre- gate Construct: Relationships with Personality and Values,” Personality and Individual Differ- ences 58 (2014): 3–8. 69 F. J. Flynn and D. R. Ames, “What’s Good for the Goose May Not Be as Good for the Gander: The Benefits of Self-Monitoring for Men and Women in Task Groups and Dyadic Conflicts,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 2 (2006): 272–81; and Snyder, Public Appear- ances/Private Realities. 70 D. V. Day, D. J. Shleicher, A. L. Unckless, and N. J. Hiller, “Self-Monitoring Personal- ity at Work: A Meta-Analytic Investigation of Construct Validity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no. 2 (2002): 390–401. 71 H. Oh and M. Kilduff, “The Ripple Effect of Personality on Social Structure: Self-

Monitoring Origins of Network Brokerage,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 5 (2008): 1155–64; and A. Mehra, M. Kilduff, and D. J. Brass, “The Social Networks of High and Low Self-Monitors: Implications for Workplace Performance,” Administrative Science Quarterly 46, no. 1 (2001): 121–46. 72 P.-Y. Liao, “The Role of Self-Concept in the Mechanism Linking Proactive Personality to Employee Work Outcomes,” Applied Psychol- ogy-An International Review 64, no. 2 (2015): 421–43. 73 K. Tornau and M. Frese, “Construct Clean- up in Proactivity Research: A Meta-Analysis on the Nomological Net of Work-Related Proactiv- ity Concepts and Their Incremental Values,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 62, no. 1 (2013): 44–96. 74 W.-D. Li, D. Fay, M. Frese, P. D. Harms, and X. Y. Gao, “Reciprocal Relationship between Proactive Personality and Work Character- istics: A Latent Change Score Approach,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 5 (2014): 948–65. 75 P. D. Converse, Patrick J. Pathak, A. M. DePaul-Haddock, T. Gotlib, and M. Merbe- done, “Controlling Your Environment and Yourself: Implications for Career Success,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 80 (2012): 148–59. 76 G. Chen, J. Farh, E. M. Campbell-Bush, Z. Wu, and X. Wu, “Teams as Innovative Systems: Mul- tilevel Motivational Antecedents of Innovation in R&D Teams,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 (2013): 1018–27. 77 Y. Gong, S.-Y. Cheung, M. Wang, and J.-C. Huang, “Unfolding the Proactive Process for Creativity: Integration of the Employee Proac- tivity, Information Exchange, and Psychological Safety Perspectives,” Journal of Management 38, no. 5 (2012): 1611–33. 78 Z. Zhang, M. Wang, and S. Junqi, “Leader- Follower Congruence in Proactive Personality and Work Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Leader-Member Exchange,” Academy of Man- agement Journal 55 (2012): 111–30. 79 G. Van Hoye and H. Lootens, “Coping with Unemployment: Personality, Role Demands, and Time Structure,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 82 (2013): 85–95. 80 R. D. Meyer, R. S. Dalal, and R. Hermida, “A Review and Synthesis of Situational Strength in the Organizational Sciences,” Journal of Management 36 (2010): 121–40. 81 R. D. Meyer, R. S. Dalal, I. J. Jose, R. Her- mida, T. R. Chen, R. P. Vega … V. P. Khare, “Measuring Job-Related Situational Strength and Assessing Its Interactive Effects with Personality on Voluntary Work Behavior,” Journal of Management 40, no. 4 (2014): 1010–41. 82 A. M. Grant and N. P. Rothbard, “When in Doubt, Seize the Day? Security Values, Proso- cial Values, and Proactivity Under Ambiguity,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 2013.

83 A. M. Watson, T. F. Thompson, J. V. Rudolph, T. J. Whelan, T. S. Behrend, et al., “When Big Brother Is Watching: Goal Orientation Shapes Reactions to Electronic Monitoring During Online Training,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 98 (2013): 642–57. 84 Y. Kim, L. Van Dyne, D. Kamdar, and R. E. Johnson, “Why and When Do Motives Matter? An Integrative Model of Motives, Role Cognitions, and Social Support as Predictors of OCB,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121 (2013): 231–45. 85 G. R. Maio, J. M. Olson, M. M. Bernard, and M. A. Luke, “Ideologies, Values, Attitudes, and Behavior,” in J. Delamater (ed.), Handbook of Social Psychology (New York: Springer, 2003), 283–308. 86 See, for instance, A. Bardi, J. A. Lee, N. Hofmann-Towfigh, and G. Soutar, “The Struc- ture of Intraindividual Value Change,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97, no. 5 (2009): 913–29. 87 S. Roccas, L. Sagiv, S. H. Schwartz, and A. Knafo, “The Big Five Personality Factors and Personal Values,” Personality and Social Psychol- ogy Bulletin 28, no. 6 (2002): 789–801. 88 B. C. Holtz and C. M. Harold, “Interper- sonal Justice and Deviance: The Moderating Effects of Interpersonal Justice Values and Justice Orientation,” Journal of Management, February 2013, 339–65. 89 See, for example, N. R. Lockwood, F. R. Cepero, and S.  Williams, The Multigenerational Workforce (Alexandria, VA: Society for Human Resource Management, 2009). 90 E. Parry and P. Urwin, “Generational Differ- ences in Work Values: A Review of Theory and Evidence,” International Journal of Management Reviews 13, no. 1 (2011): 79–96. 91 J. M. Twenge, S. M. Campbell, B. J. Hoff- man, and C. E. Lance, “Generational Differ- ences in Work Values: Leisure and Extrinsic Values Increasing, Social and Intrinsic Values Decreasing,” Journal of Management 36, no. 5 (2010): 1117–42. 92 B. J. Dik, S. R. Strife, and J.-I. C. Hansen, “The Flip Side of Holland Type Congru- ence: Incongruence and Job Satisfaction,” Career Development Quarterly 58, no. 4 (2010): 352–58; A. Rezaei, A. Qorbanpoor, T. A. Gatab, and A. Rezaei, “Comparative Research for Personality Types of Guilan University Physical Exercise and Counseling Students Based on Holland Theory,” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011): 2032–36; and D. L. Ohler and E. M. Levinson, “Using Holland’s Theory in Employment Counsel- ing: Focus on Service Occupations,” Journal of Employment Counseling 49, no. 4 (2012): 148–59. 93 Y. Lee and J. Antonakis, “When Prefer- ence Is Not Satisfied but the Individual Is: How Power Distance Moderates Person-Job Fit,” Journal of Management 40, no. 3 (2014): 641–57.

Personality and Values CHAPTER 5 167

94 See W. Arthur Jr., S. T. Bell, A. J. Villado, and D. Doverspike, “The Use of Person-Organiza- tion Fit in Employment Decision-Making: An Assessment of Its Criterion-Related Validity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 4 (2006): 786–801; and J. R. Edwards, D. M. Cable, I. O. Williamson, L. S. Lambert, and A. J. Shipp, “The Phenomenology of Fit: Linking the Person and Environment to the Subjective Ex- perience of Person–Environment Fit,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 4 (2006): 802–27. 95 A. Leung and S. Chaturvedi, “Linking the Fits, Fitting the Links: Connecting Different Types of PO Fit to Attitudinal Outcomes,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, October 2011, 391–402. 96 M. L. Verquer, T. A. Beehr, and S. E. Wag- ner, “A Meta-Analysis of Relations between Person–Organization Fit and Work Attitudes,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 63, no. 3 (2003):

473–89; and J. C. Carr, A. W. Pearson, M. J. Vest, and S. L. Boyar, “Prior Occupational Experience, Anticipatory Socialization, and Employee Retention, Journal of Management 32, no. 32 (2006): 343–59. 97 K. H. Ehrhart, D. M. Mayer, and J. C. Ziegert, “Web-based Recruitment in the Millennial Generation: Work-Life Balance, Website Usability, and Organizational Attraction,” European Journal of Work and Orga- nizational Psychology 21, no. 6 (2012): 850–74. 98 I.-S. Oh, R. P. Guay, K. Kim, C. M. Harold, J. H. Lee, C.-G. Heo, and K.-H. Shin, “Fit Happens Globally: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of the Relationships of Person-Environment Fit Dimensions with Work Attitudes and Perfor- mance across East Asia, Europe, and North America,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 99–152. 99 See The Hofstede Centre, www.geert- hofstede.com.

100 V. Taras, B. L. Kirkman, and P. Steel, “Examining the Impact of Culture’s Conse- quences: A Three-Decade, Multilevel, Meta- Analytic Review of Hofstede’s Cultural Value Dimensions,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 5 (2010): 405–39. 101 M. Javidan and R. J. House, “Cultural Acumen for the Global Manager: Les- sons from Project GLOBE,” Organizational Dynamics 29, no. 4 (2001): 289–305; and R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, and P. W. Dorfman (eds.), Leadership, Culture, and Organizations: The GLOBE Study of 62 Societies (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2004). 102 J. P. Meyer, D. J. Stanley, T. A. Jackson, K. J. McInnis, E. R. Maltin, et al., “Affective, Normative, and Continuance Commitment Levels across Cultures: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 80 (2012): 225–45.

S ou

rc e:

A na

V en

eg as

/Z U

M A

Pr es

s/ N

ew sc

om

Perception and Individual Decision Making

6

168

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 169

Is Palmer luckey lucky or masterfully creatIve?

What would you do if you were 22 years old and Mark Zuckerberg said your invention was “the coolest thing I’ve ever seen”—and then bought your company for $2.3 billion? Palmer Luckey, inventor of the Oculus

Rift virtual reality headset (pictured on the right), first went

shopping for another recent innovation, the Tesla car. And then he got to work at Facebook so his invention could be sold to

consumers in 2016.

Luckey follows in the footsteps of fellow backyard inno-

vators Zuckerberg and Apple’s Steve Jobs, dropping out of

college to tinker in a garage with an idea that just might

revolutionize the world. His virtual reality headset may have

an impact in architecture, education, business, medicine,

psychology, and any field where putting people in a virtual

situation they believe is real can help. Imagine an architect

walking through her new building before it exists and a stu-

dent physician performing open-heart surgery without risk to a real patient. Think of all the errors that could be reduced if we

could virtually live through the consequences of some of our

decisions before enacting them. How could one young man make all these

sci-fi scenarios possible when scores of others have failed for decades?

A close look at Luckey’s life may reveal some clues to understanding an

individual’s creativity variables.

6-1 Explain the factors that influence perception.

6-2 Describe attribution theory.

6-3 Explain the link between perception and decision making.

6-4 Contrast the rational model of decision making with bounded rationality and intuition.

6-5 Explain how individual differences and organizational constraints affect decision making.

6-6 Contrast the three ethical decision criteria.

6-7 Describe the three-stage model of creativity.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

170 PART 2 The Individual

Luckey was imaginative with technology in his early life; in his teens,

he built computers and video game consoles. As a home-schooled kid, he

also loved learning on his own “about electronics, engineering, how the

world ticks.” He set his sights on fame. “Ever since I was 15 I’ve tried to

act and talk as if I was a public figure, because I was sure that I would be

one day and wanted to be prepared,” he said. Then the movie The Matrix,

about virtual reality, sparked his imagination. Although the film was sci- ence fiction, Luckey saw potential in optimizing the virtual reality experi-

ence. He used his imagination and his income from repairing iPhones to

build a prototype virtual reality headset. “It wasn’t very good,” he admit-

ted. But instead of quitting, Luckey worked harder and soon realized a

breakthrough, a headset that tricked the visual cortex into interpreting the

images as real. He quickly broadcast his success and used crowdfunding

to raise capital, aiming for $250,000 to build a few hundred units. Instead,

he raised $2.4 million and attracted the attention of venture capital firm

Andreessen Horowitz, which invested $75 million in his idea. Facebook bought the company 2 years later.

Luckey is not modest about his success. “I brought [the virtual reality

experience] back from the dead,” he said. He identifies with innovation he-

roes and seeks the spotlight. “If you look at who most people respect now,

they don’t idolize politicians, they idolize these people founding companies,

the self-made entrepreneurs,” he observed. Luckey reads and replies to

all his fan mail and is the public face of Oculus Rift. Yet he claims he is now after something bigger than his own fame—a technology that changes

the world. “This isn’t about me, it’s about something much, much bigger—

bigger than perhaps any of us.”

This look at Luckey’s life may show one winning formula for individual cre-

ativity: a longstanding, focused interest; openness to learning new things; a

knowledge-seeking attitude; a degree of narcissism manifested in a desire

for renown and a belief in your own capabilities; perseverance; willingness

to work hard; and enough extraversion to reach out for help and support. As

Luckey’s buddy and CEO Brendan Iribe (pictured on the left) said, “Maybe

his name is Luckey for a reason.”

Sources: T. Clark, “How Palmer Luckey Created Oculus Rift,” The Smithsonian, November 2014, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/how-palmer-luckey-created-oculus-rift- 180953049/?no-ist=&page=1; J. Ensor, “Oculus Rift’s Palmer Luckey: ‘I Brought Virtual Reality from the Dead,” The Telegraph, January 2, 2015, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ technology/11309013/Oculus-Rifts-Palmer-Luckey-I-brought-virtual-reality-back-from-the- dead.html; and J. Vilaga, “100 Most Creative People in Business 2014,” Fast Company, 2014, http://www.fastcompany.com/3029369/most-creative-people-2014/palmer-luckey.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 171

The case of Palmer Luckey illustrates how important—and perhaps rare—an individual’s creativity can be to an industry. As we will see later in the chapter, the creativity of individuals can lead to breakthroughs in innovation. To better understand what influences us and our organizations, we start at the roots of our thought processes: our perceptions and the way they affect our decision making.

What Is Perception? Perception is a process by which we organize and interpret sensory impressions in order to give meaning to our environment. What we perceive can be substantially different from objective reality. For example, all employees in a firm may view it as a great place to work—favorable working conditions, interesting job assignments, good pay, excellent benefits, understanding and responsible management—but, as most of us know, it’s very unusual to find agreement universal opinion.

Why is perception important in the study of OB? Simply because people’s behavior is based on their perception of what reality is, not on reality itself. The world as it is perceived is the world that is behaviorally important. In other words, our perception becomes the reality from which we act. To understand what all of us have in common in our interpretations of reality, we need to begin with the factors that influence our perceptions.

factors that Influence Perception A number of factors shape and sometimes distort perception. These factors can reside in the perceiver, the object or target being perceived, or the situation in which the perception is made (see Exhibit 6-1).

Perceiver When you look at a target, your interpretation of what you see is influenced by your personal characteristics—attitudes, personality, motives, interests, past experiences, and expectations. In some ways, we hear what we

6-1 Explain the factors that influence perception. perception A process by which individuals organize and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give meaning to their environment.

factors that Influence PerceptionExhibit 6-1

Perception

• Attitudes • Motives • Interests • Experience • Expectations

Factors in the perceiver

Factors in the target • Novelty • Motion • Sounds • Size • Background • Proximity • Similarity

Factors in the situation • Time • Work setting • Social setting

172 PART 2 The Individual

want to hear1 and we see what we want to see—not because it’s the truth, but because it conforms to our thinking. For instance, recent research indicated that supervisors perceived employees who started work earlier in the day as more conscientious and therefore as higher performers; however, supervisors who were night owls themselves were less likely to make that erroneous assumption.2 Some perceptions created by attitudes like these can be counteracted by objec- tive evaluation, but others can be insidious. Consider, for instance, observer per- ceptions of a recent shooting in New York. There were two eyewitnesses—one said a police officer chased and shot a fleeing man; the other said a handcuffed man lying on the ground was shot. Neither perceived the situation correctly: The man was actually attempting to attack a police officer with a hammer when he was shot by another officer.3

target The characteristics of the target also affect what we perceive. Because we don’t look at targets in isolation, the relationship of a target to its back- ground influences perception, as does our tendency to group close things and similar things together. We can perceive women, men, whites, African Ameri- cans, Asians, or members of any other group that has clearly distinguishable characteristics as alike in other, unrelated ways as well. Often, these assumptions are harmful, as when people who have criminal records are prejudged in the workplace even when it is known they were wrongly arrested.4 Sometimes differ- ences can work in our favor, though, such as when we are drawn to targets that are different from what we expect. For instance, in a recent study participants respected a professor wearing a T-shirt and sneakers in the classroom more than the same professor dressed traditionally. The professor stood out from the norm for the classroom setting and was therefore perceived as an individualist.5

context Context matters too. The time at which we see an object or event can influence our attention, as can location, light, heat, or situational factors. For in- stance, at a club on Saturday night you may not notice someone “decked out.” Yet that same person so attired for your Monday morning management class would certainly catch your attention. Neither the perceiver nor the target has changed between Saturday night and Monday morning, but the situation is different.

People are usually not aware of the factors that influence their view of reality. In fact, people are not even that perceptive about their own abilities.6 Thank- fully, awareness and objective measures can reduce our perception distortions. For instance, when people are asked to ponder specific aspects of their ability, they become more realistic in their self-perceptions.7 Let’s next consider how we make perceptions of others.

Watch It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Orpheus Group Casting: Social Perception and Attribution.

Person Perception: Making Judgments About Others The perception concepts most relevant to OB include person perceptions, or the perceptions people form about each other. Many of our perceptions of oth- ers are formed by first impressions and small cues that have little supporting

6-2 Explain attribution theory.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 173

evidence. This is particularly troublesome—but common—when we infer an- other person’s morality. Research indicates we form our strongest impressions based on what we perceive about another’s moral character, but our initial in- formation about this can be sketchy and unfounded.8 Let’s unravel some of our other human tendencies that interfere with correct person perception, begin- ning with the evidence behind attribution theory.

attribution theory Nonliving objects such as desks, machines, and buildings are subject to the laws of nature, but they have no beliefs, motives, or intentions. People do. When we observe people, we attempt to explain their behavior. Our perception and judg- ment of a person’s actions are influenced by the assumptions we make about that person’s state of mind.

Attribution theory tries to explain the ways we judge people differently, depending on the meaning we attribute to a behavior.9 For instance, consider what you think when people smile at you. Do you think they are cooperative, exploitative, or competitive? We assign meaning to smiles and other expressions in many different ways.10

Attribution theory suggests that when we observe an individual’s behavior, we attempt to determine whether it was internally or externally caused. That determination depends largely on three factors: (1) distinctiveness, (2) con- sensus, and (3) consistency. Let’s clarify the differences between internal and external causation, and then we’ll discuss the determining factors.

Internally caused behaviors are those an observer believes to be under the personal behavioral control of another individual. Externally caused behavior is what we imagine the situation forced the individual to do. If an employee is late for work, you might attribute that to his overnight partying and subsequent oversleeping. This is an internal attribution. But if you attribute his lateness to a traffic snarl, you are making an external attribution.

Now let’s discuss the three determining factors. Distinctiveness refers to whether an individual displays different behaviors in different situations. Is the employee who arrives late today also one who regularly “blows off” other kinds of commitments? What we want to know is whether this behavior is unusual. If it is, we are likely to give it an external attribution. If it’s not, we will probably judge the behavior to be internal.

If everyone who faces a similar situation responds in the same way, we can say the behavior shows consensus. The behavior of our tardy employee meets this criterion if all employees who took the same route were also late. From an attri- bution perspective, if consensus is high, you would probably give an external attribution to the employee’s tardiness, whereas if other employees who took the same route made it to work on time, you would attribute his lateness to an internal cause.

Finally, an observer looks for consistency in a person’s actions. Does the per- son respond the same way over time? Coming in 10 minutes late for work is not perceived the same for an employee who hasn’t been late for several months as for an employee who is late three times a week. The more consistent the behav- ior, the more we are inclined to attribute it to internal causes.

Exhibit 6-2 summarizes the key elements in attribution theory. It tells us, for instance, that if an employee, Katelyn, generally performs at about the same level on related tasks as she does on her current task (low distinctiveness), other employees frequently perform differently—better or worse—than Katelyn on that task (low consensus), and Katelyn’s performance on this current task is con- sistent over time (high consistency), anyone judging Katelyn’s work will likely hold her primarily responsible for her task performance (internal attribution).

attribution theory An attempt to determine whether an individual’s behavior is internally or externally caused.

174 PART 2 The Individual

Errors or biases distort attributions. When we make judgments about the behavior of other people, we tend to underestimate the influence of exter- nal factors and overestimate the influence of internal or personal factors.11 This  fundamental attribution error can explain why a sales manager attri- butes the poor performance of her sales agents to laziness rather than to a competitor’s innovative product line. Individuals and organizations tend to attribute their own successes to internal factors such as ability or effort, while blaming failure on external factors such as bad luck or difficult coworkers. People tend to attribute ambiguous information as relatively flat- tering, accept  positive feedback, and reject negative feedback. This is called self-serving bias.12

The evidence on cultural differences in perception is mixed, but most sug- gests there are differences across cultures in the attributions people make.13 In one study, Asian managers were more likely to blame institutions or whole orga- nizations when things went wrong, whereas Western observers believed indi- vidual managers should get blame or praise.14 That probably explains why U.S. newspapers feature the names of individual executives when firms do poorly, whereas Asian media report the firm as a whole has failed. This tendency to make group-based attributions also explains why individuals from Asian cul- tures, which are more collectivistic in orientation, are more likely to use group stereotypes.15

Self-serving biases may be less common in East Asian cultures, but evi- dence suggests they still operate there.16 Studies indicate Chinese managers assess blame for mistakes using the same distinctiveness, consensus, and consis- tency cues Western managers use.17 They also become angry and punish those deemed responsible for failure, a reaction shown in many studies of Western managers. It may just take more evidence for Asian managers to conclude some- one else should be blamed.

The concept of attribution theory significantly advances our understand- ing of people perception by helping us identify why we draw certain con- clusions from people’s behavior. Having introduced person perception, let’s consider the common shortcuts we use to simplify our processing of others’ behavior.

fundamental attribution error The tendency to underestimate the influence of external factors and overestimate the influence of internal factors when making judgments about the behavior of others.

self-serving bias The tendency for individuals to attribute their own successes to internal factors and put the blame for failures on external factors.

attribution theoryExhibit 6-2

Individual behavior

External

Internal

External

Internal

Internal

External

Distinctiveness

Observation Attributionof cause

High

Low

High

Low

High

Low

Interpretation

Consistency

Consensus

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 175

common shortcuts in Judging others Shortcuts for judging others often allow us to make accurate perceptions rapidly and provide valid data for making predictions. However, they can and do some- times result in significant distortions.

selective Perception Any characteristic that makes a person, an object, or an event stand out will increase the probability we will perceive it. Why? Because it is impossible for us to assimilate everything we see; we can take in only certain stimuli. Thus, you are more likely to notice cars like your own, and your boss may reprimand some people and not others doing the same thing. Because we can’t observe everything going on around us, we use selective perception. But we don’t choose randomly: We select according to our interests, background, experience, and attitudes. Seeing what we want to see, we sometimes draw unwarranted conclusions from an ambiguous situation.

Halo effect When we draw an impression about an individual on the basis of a  single characteristic, such as intelligence, sociability, or appearance,

selective perception The tendency to selectively interpret what one sees on the basis of one’s interests, background, experience, and attitudes.

I’m often late to work; something always comes up at the last minute. But my boss is such a jerk about it! He’s threatening to install a time clock. This is so insulting—I’m in man- agement, I’m a professional, I’m on salary, and I do the work! Please tell me how to talk some sense into him.

—Renée Dear Renée, This issue seems to be very frustrating to you, and we’d like to help you elimi- nate that dissatisfaction. Let’s start by analyzing why you and your boss think differently on the issue. You and he certainly perceive of the situation differently—he sees your lateness as a violation, and you see it as a natural occurrence. In many other jobs, precise timing may not be expected, valued, or needed. Perhaps your boss is trying to highlight the value he places on punc- tuality. Or maybe he sees your lateness as unethical behavior that cheats your organization of your valuable work time.

According to Ann Tenbrunsel, Direc- tor of the Institute for Ethical Business Worldwide, the way we look at our de- cisions changes our perception of our

behaviors. You view your tardiness as something that just happens, not part of a decision process. What if you looked at your tardiness as a daily ethi- cal decision? Your organization has a start time to which you agreed as a con- dition of your employment, so coming in late is a deviation from the standard. There are actions you can take through- out your early morning that control your arrival time. So, by this model, your be- havior is unethical.

Your situation is not uncommon; we all have moral blind spots, or situations with ethical ramifications we don’t see. Also, as we said earlier, other organi- zations may not care about your arrival time, so it’s not always an ethical situa- tion. But for situations where ethics are in play, research indicates punishment doesn’t work. Reframing the decisions so we see the ethical implications does work. Try these steps to gain insight:

• Look at the motives for your decisions during your morning routine. Can you see where you make choices?

• Consider your past actions. When you think back about your early morn- ing decisions, do you find yourself

justifying your delays? Justification signals that our decisions might be suspect.

• Look at the facts. How do the reasons for your past delays reflect attitudes you have unconsciously acted on?

If you can see the ethical aspect of your daily lateness, you can work to meet the expectation. Think briefly about the ethics of your morning choic- es when you first wake up, and you’ll be much more likely to be on time.

Sources: C. Moore and A. E. Tenbrunsel, “‘Just Think About It’? Cognitive Complexity and Moral Choice,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 123, no. 2 (2014): 138–49; A. Tenbrunsel, Ethical Sys- tems, www.ethicalsystems.org/content/ann- tenbrunsel, accessed May 7, 2015; Review and podcast of Blind Spots: Why We Fail to Do What’s Right and What to Do about It, May 4, 2015, http://press.princeton.edu/ titles/9390.html, accessed May 7, 2015.

The opinions provided here are of the authors only. The authors are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or their related part- nerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

so what if i’m a few minutes late to work? career oBjectives

176 PART 2 The Individual

a halo  effect is operating.18 The halo effect is easy to demonstrate. If you knew someone was, say, gregarious, what else would you infer? You probably wouldn’t say the person was introverted, right? You might assume the person was loud, happy, or quick-witted, when in fact gregarious does not include those other attributes. As managers, we need to be careful not to draw infer- ences from small clues.

contrast effects An old adage among entertainers is “Never follow an act that has kids or animals in it.” Why? Audiences love children and animals so much that you’ll look bad in comparison. This example demonstrates how the contrast effect can distort perceptions. We don’t evaluate a person in isolation. Our reaction is influenced by other people we have recently encountered.

In a series of job interviews, for instance, a candidate is likely to receive a more favorable evaluation if preceded by mediocre applicants and a less favor- able evaluation if preceded by strong applicants. Thus, interviewers can make distortions in any given candidate’s evaluation as a result of his place in the interview schedule.

stereotyping When we judge someone on the basis of our perception of the group to which he or she belongs, we are stereotyping.19

We deal with the unmanageable number of stimuli of our complex world by using stereotypes or shortcuts called heuristics to make decisions quickly. For example, it does make sense to assume that Allison from finance will be able to help you figure out a forecasting problem. The challenge occurs when we generalize inaccurately or too much. Stereotypes can be deeply ingrained and powerful enough to influence life-and-death decisions. One study, controlling for a wide array of factors (such as aggravating or mitigating circumstances), showed that the degree to which black defendants in murder trials looked “ste- reotypically black” essentially doubled their odds of receiving a death sentence if convicted.20 Another study found that students tended to assign higher scores

halo effect The tendency to draw a general impression about an individual on the basis of a single characteristic.

contrast effect Evaluation of a person’s characteristics that is affected by compari- sons with other people recently encountered who rank higher or lower on the same characteristics.

stereotyping Judging someone on the basis of one’s perception of the group to which that person belongs.

Nurse Li Hongfei, who works at No. 4 People’s Hospital in Shenyang, China, experiences negative stereotyping based on his gender. Like Li, male nurses in many countries report that gender stereotyping generalizes inac- curately that nursing is a profession for only women because men lack the patience, empathy, and compassion required to succeed as a nurse. Source: Zhang Wenkui Xinhua News Agency/Newscom

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 177

for leadership potential and effective leadership to whites than to minorities, supporting the stereotype of whites as better leaders.21

One problem with stereotypes is that they are widespread generalizations, though they may not contain a shred of truth when applied to a particular person or situation. We have to monitor ourselves to make sure we’re not unfairly applying a stereotype in our evaluations and decisions. Stereotypes are an example of the warning, “The more useful, the more danger from misuse.”

It should be obvious by now that our perceptions, many of which are near-instantaneous and without conscious deliberation, color our outlook. Sometimes they have little impact on anyone, but more often our perceptions greatly influence our decisions. The first step toward increasing the effective- ness of organizational decision making is to understand the perception process on an individualized level, discussed next.

specific applications of shortcuts in organizations People in organizations are always judging each other. Managers must appraise their employees’ performances. We evaluate how much effort our coworkers are putting into their jobs. Team members immediately “size up” a new person. In many cases, our judgments have important consequences for the organization. Let’s look at the most obvious applications.

employment Interview Few people are hired without an interview. But inter- viewers make perceptual judgments that are often inaccurate22 and draw early impressions that quickly become entrenched. Research shows we form impres- sions of others within a tenth of a second, based on our first glance.23 Most interviewers’ decisions change very little after the first 4 or 5 minutes of an interview. As a result, information elicited early in the interview carries greater weight than does information elicited later, and a “good applicant” is probably characterized more by the absence of unfavorable characteristics than by the presence of favorable ones. Our individual intuition about a job candidate is not reliable in predicting job performance, so collecting input from multiple independent evaluators can be predictive.24

Performance expectations People attempt to validate their perceptions of reality even when these perceptions are faulty.25 The terms self-fulfilling prophecy and Pygmalion effect describe how an individual’s behavior is determined by others’ expectations. If a manager expects big things from her people, they’re not likely to let her down. Similarly, if she expects only minimal performance, they’ll likely meet those low expectations. Expectations become reality. The self-fulfilling prophecy has been found to affect the performance of students, soldiers, and even accountants.26

Performance evaluations We’ll discuss performance evaluations in Chapter 17, but note that they very much depend on the perceptual process.27 An employee’s future is closely tied to his or her appraisal—promotion, pay raises, and con- tinuation of employment are among the outcomes. Although the appraisal can be objective (for example, a salesperson is appraised on how many dollars of sales he generates in his territory), many jobs are evaluated subjectively. Subjec- tive evaluations, though often necessary, are problematic because of the errors we’ve discussed—selective perception, contrast effects, halo effects, and so on. Sometimes performance ratings say as much about the evaluator as they do about the employee!

self-fulfilling prophecy A situation in which a person inaccurately perceives a second person, and the resulting expectations cause the second person to behave in ways consistent with the original perception.

178 PART 2 The Individual

The Link Between Perception and Individual Decision Making Individuals make decisions, choices from among two or more alternatives. Ideally, decision making would be an objective process, but the way individuals make decisions and the quality of their choices are largely influenced by their perceptions. Individual decision making is an important factor of behavior at all levels of an organization.

Decision making occurs as a reaction to a problem. That is, a discrepancy exists between the current state of affairs and some desired state, requiring us to consider alternative courses of action. If your car breaks down and you rely on it to get to work, you have a problem that requires a decision on your part.28 Unfortunately, most problems don’t come neatly labeled. One person’s problem

6-3 Explain the link between perception and decision making.

decisions Choices made from among two or more alternatives.

problem A discrepancy between the current state of affairs and some desired state.

T his statement is false. Positive stereotypes exist as much as negative ones. A study of Princeton University stu-

dents shows, for example, that even today we believe Germans are better workers, Italians and African Americans are more loyal, Jews and Chinese are more intelligent, and Japanese and English are more courteous. What is surprising is that positive stereotypes are not always positive.

We may be more likely to “choke” (fail to perform) when we identify with positive stereotypes because they in- duce pressure to perform at the ste- reotypical level. For example, men are commonly believed to have higher math ability than women. One study shows that when this stereotype is ac- tivated before men take a math test, their performance on the test actually goes down. Another study found that the belief that white men are better at science and math than women or minorities caused white men to leave science, technology, engineering, and math majors. Finally, a study used basketball to illustrate the complexity of stereotypes. Researchers provided evidence to one group of undergradu-

ates that whites were better free throw shooters than blacks. Another group was provided evidence that blacks were better free throw shooters than whites. A third group was given no stereotypic information. The undergraduates in all three groups then shot free throws while observers watched. The people who performed the worst were those in the negative stereotype condition (black undergraduates who were told whites were better and white under- graduates who were told blacks were better). However, the positive stereo- type group (black undergraduates who were told blacks were better and white undergraduates who were told whites were better) also did not perform well. The best performance was turned in by those in the group without stereotypic information.

“Choking” is not the only negative thing about positive stereotypes. Re- search revealed that when women or Asian Americans heard positive stereo- types about themselves (“women are nurturing”; “Asians are good at math”), they felt depersonalized and reacted negatively to the individual express- ing the positive stereotype. Another study showed that positive stereotypes

about African Americans actually solidi- fied negative stereotypes because any stereotype tends to reinforce group- based differences, whether positive or negative.

Stereotypes are understandable. To function, we need shortcuts. This short- cut, however, runs both ways. Because stereotypes are socially learned, we need to be vigilant about not accepting or propagating them among our cowork- ers and peers.

Sources: A. C. Kay, M. V. Day, M. P. Zanna, and A. D. Nussbaum, “The Insidious (and Ironic) Effects of Positive Stereotypes,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49 (2013): 287–91; J. O. Sly and S. Cheryan, “When Compliments Fail to Flatter: American Individualism and Responses to Positive Ste- reotypes,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104 (2013): 87–102; M. J. Tagler, “Choking under the Pressure of a Positive Stereotype: Gender Identification and Self- Consciousness Moderate Men’s Math Test Performance,” Journal of Social Psychology 152 (2012): 401–16; M. A. Beasley and M. J. Fischer, “Why They Leave: The Impact of Stereotype Threat on the Attrition of Wom- en and Minorities from Science, Math and Engineering Majors,” Social Psychology of Education 15 (2012): 427–48; and A. Krendl, I. Gainsburg, and N. Ambady, “The Effects of Stereotypes and Observer Pressure on Athletic Performance,” Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology 34 (2012): 3–15.

all stereotypes are negative myth or science?

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 179

is another person’s satisfactory state of affairs. One manager may view her divi- sion’s 2 percent decline in quarterly sales to be a serious problem requiring immediate action on her part. Her counterpart in another division, who also had a 2 percent sales decrease, might consider it quite acceptable. So aware- ness that a problem exists and that a decision might or might not be needed is a perceptual issue.

Every decision requires us to interpret and evaluate information. We typi- cally receive data from multiple sources that we need to screen, process, and interpret. Which data are relevant to the decision, and which are not? Our per- ceptions will answer that question. We also need to develop alternatives and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses. Again, our perceptual process will affect the outcome. Finally, we have to consider how our perceptions of the situation influence our decisions. For instance, how good are you at saying no? Research indicates that we perceive that saying no is uncomfortable, and often after saying no we will feel obligated to say yes to subsequent requests. In fact, people are so uncomfortable saying no that they may agree to unethical acts. When student participants in a study asked 108 strangers to write “pickle” in library books, half of them did it!29

Decision Making in Organizations Business schools train students to follow rational decision-making models. While such rationalistic models have merit, they don’t always describe how people make decisions. OB improves the way we make decisions in organiza- tions by addressing the decision-making errors people commit in addition to the perception errors we’ve discussed. First, we describe some decision-making constructs, and then outline a few of the most common errors.

the rational model, Bounded rationality, and Intuition In OB, there are generally accepted constructs of decision making each of us employs to make determinations: rational decision making, bounded rational- ity, and intuition. Though their processes make sense, they may not lead to the most accurate (or best) decisions. More importantly, there are times when one strategy may lead to a better outcome than another in a given situation.

rational Decision making We often think the best decision maker is rational and makes consistent, value-maximizing choices within specified constraints.30 Rational decisions follow a six-step rational decision-making model31 (see Exhibit 6-3).

The rational decision-making model assumes the decision maker has complete information, is able to identify all relevant options in an unbi- ased manner, and chooses the option with the highest utility.32 In reality,

6-4 Contrast the rational model of decision making with bounded rationality and intuition.

rational Characterized by making consistent, value-maximizing choices within specified constraints.

rational decision-making model A decision-making model that describes how individuals should behave in order to maximize some outcome.

steps in the rational Decision-making modelExhibit 6-3

1. Define the problem. 2. Identify the decision criteria. 3. Allocate weights to the criteria. 4. Develop the alternatives. 5. Evaluate the alternatives. 6. Select the best alternative.

180 PART 2 The Individual

though, most decisions don’t follow the rational model; people are usually content to find an acceptable or reasonable solution to a problem rather than an optimal one. We tend to limit our choices to the neighborhood of the problem’s symptom and the current alternative at hand. As one expert in decision making put it, “Most significant decisions are made by judgment, rather than by a defined prescriptive model.”33 People are remarkably unaware of making suboptimal decisions.34

Bounded rationality Often, we don’t follow the rational decision-making model for a reason: Our limited information-processing capability makes it impossible to assimilate all the information necessary to optimize, even if the information is readily obtainable.35 Many problems don’t have an optimal solution because they are too complicated to fit the rational decision-making model, so people satisfice; they seek solutions that are satisfactory and sufficient. We tend to reduce complex problems to a level we can readily understand.

Because the human mind cannot formulate and solve complex problems with full rationality, we operate within the confines of bounded rationality. We construct simplified models that extract the essential features from problems without capturing all their complexity. We can then behave rationally within the limits of the simple model.

How does bounded rationality work for the typical individual? Once we’ve identified a problem, we begin to search for criteria and alternatives. The crite- ria are unlikely to be exhaustive. We identify alternatives that are highly visible and that usually represent familiar criteria and tried-and-true solutions. Next, we begin reviewing the alternatives, focusing on choices that differ little from the current state until we identify one that is “good enough”—that meets an acceptable level of performance. Thus ends our search. Therefore, the solution represents a satisficing choice—the first acceptable one we encounter—rather than an optimal one.

bounded rationality A process of making decisions by constructing simplified models that extract the essential features from problems without capturing all their complexity.

Nintendo president Satoru Iwata (right) and DeNA president Isao Moriyasu operated within the confines of bounded rationality in deciding to form an alliance to develop and operate new game applications for mobile devices. The alliance brings Nintendo’s games and characters to the mobile user market and strength- ens DeNA’s mobile gaming business. Source: Akio Kon/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 181

Satisficing is not always bad—a simple process may frequently be more sen- sible than the traditional rational decision-making model.36 To use the rational model, you need to gather a great deal of information about all the options, compute applicable weights, and then calculate values across a huge number of criteria. All these processes can cost time, energy, and money. If there are many unknown weights and preferences, the fully rational model may not be any more accurate than a best guess. Sometimes a fast-and-frugal process of solving problems might be your best option.

Intuition Perhaps the least rational way of making decisions is intuitive decision making, an unconscious process created from distilled experience.37 Intuitive decision making occurs outside conscious thought; relies on holistic associa- tions, or links between disparate pieces of information; is fast; and is affectively charged, meaning it engages the emotions.38 While intuition isn’t rational, it isn’t necessarily wrong. Nor does it always contradict rational analysis; the two can complement each other.

Does intuition help effective decision making? Researchers are divided, but most experts are skeptical, in part because intuition is hard to measure and ana- lyze. Probably the best advice from one expert is: “Intuition can be very useful as a way of setting up a hypothesis but is unacceptable as ‘proof.’” Use hunches derived from your experience to speculate, yes, but always make sure to test those hunches with objective data and rational, dispassionate analysis.39

As you can see, the more we use objective processes for decision making, the more likely we are to correct some of the problems with our perceptual process. Just as there are biases and errors in the perception process, it stands to reason there are identifiable biases and errors in our decision making, which we will outline next.

common Biases and errors in Decision making Decision makers engage in bounded rationality, but they also allow systematic biases and errors to creep into their judgments.40 To minimize effort and avoid trade-offs, people tend to rely too heavily on experience, impulses, gut feelings,

intuitive decision making An unconscious process created out of distilled experience.

Intuition plays an important role in the investment buying decisions of Warren Buffett, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. Buffett begins exploring investment alternatives by using his intuition as a guide in select- ing a firm he understands and finds interesting before he starts analyzing the firm, its industry, and its valuation. Source: Xinhua/Alamy

182 PART 2 The Individual

and convenient rules of thumb. Shortcuts can distort rationality. Following are the most common biases in decision making. Exhibit 6-4 provides some sugges- tions for how to avoid falling into these biases and errors.

overconfidence Bias We tend to be overconfident about our abilities and the abilities of others; also, we are usually not aware of this bias.41 For example, when people say they’re 90 percent confident about the range a certain number might take, their estimated ranges contain the correct answer only about 50 per- cent of the time—and experts are no more accurate in setting up confidence intervals than are novices.42

Individuals whose intellectual and interpersonal abilities are weakest are most likely to overestimate their performance and ability.43 There’s also a nega- tive relationship between entrepreneurs’ optimism and performance of their new ventures: the more optimistic, the less successful.44 The tendency to be too confident about their ideas might keep some from planning how to avoid problems that arise.

Investor overconfidence operates in a variety of ways.45 Finance professor Terrance Odean says, “People think they know more than they do, and it costs them.” Investors, especially novices, overestimate not just their skill in process- ing information, but also the quality of the information. Most investors will do only as well as or just slightly better than the market.

anchoring Bias Anchoring bias is a tendency to fixate on initial information and fail to adequately adjust for subsequent information.46 As we discussed earlier in the chapter in relationship to employment interviews, the mind appears to give a disproportionate amount of emphasis to the first information it receives. Anchors are widely used by people in professions in which persuasion skills are important—advertising, management, politics, real estate, and law.

anchoring bias A tendency to fixate on initial information, from which one then fails to adequately adjust for subsequent information.

reducing Biases and errorsExhibit 6-4

Source: S. P. Robbins, Decide & Conquer: Making Winning Decisions and Taking Control of Your Life (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial

Times/Prentice Hall, 2004), 164–68.

Focus on Goals. Without goals, you can’t be rational, you don’t know what information you need, you don’t know which information is relevant and which is irrelevant, you’ll find it difficult to choose between alternatives, and you’re far more likely to experience regret over the choices you make. Clear goals make decision making easier and help you eliminate options that are inconsistent with your interests.

Look for Information That Disconfirms Your Beliefs. One of the most effective means for counteracting overconfidence and the confirmation and hindsight biases is to actively look for information that contradicts your beliefs and assumptions. When we overtly consider various ways we could be wrong, we challenge our tendencies to think we’re smarter than we actually are.

Don’t Try to Create Meaning out of Random Events. The educated mind has been trained to look for cause-and-effect relationships. When something happens, we ask why. And when we can’t find reasons, we often invent them. You have to accept that there are events in life that are outside your control. Ask yourself if patterns can be meaningfully explained or whether they are merely coincidence. Don’t attempt to create meaning out of coincidence.

Increase Your Options. No matter how many options you’ve identified, your final choice can be no better than the best of the option set you’ve selected. This argues for increasing your decision alternatives and for using creativity in developing a wide range of diverse choices. The more alternatives you can generate, and the more diverse those alternatives, the greater your chance of finding an outstanding one.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 183

Any time a negotiation takes place, so does anchoring. When a prospec- tive employer asks how much you made in your prior job, your answer typically anchors the employer’s offer. (Remember this when you negotiate your salary, but set the anchor only as high as you truthfully can.) The more precise your anchor, the smaller the adjustment. Some research suggests people think of making an adjustment after an anchor is set as rounding off a number: If you suggest a salary of $55,000, your boss will consider $50,000 to $60,000 a reason- able range for negotiation, but if you mention $55,650, your boss is more likely to consider $55,000 to $56,000 the range of likely values.47

confirmation Bias The rational decision-making process assumes we objectively gather information. But we don’t. We selectively gather it. Confirmation bias represents a case of selective perception: we seek out information that reaffirms our past choices, and we discount information that contradicts them.48 We also tend to accept at face value information that confirms our preconceived views, while we are skeptical of information that challenges them. We even tend to seek sources most likely to tell us what we want to hear, and we give too much weight to supporting information and too little to contradictory. Fortunately, those who feel there is a strong need to be accurate in making a decision are less prone to confirmation bias.

availability Bias More people fear flying more than driving in a car. But if fly- ing on a commercial airline were as dangerous as driving, the equivalent of two 747s filled to capacity would crash every week, killing all aboard. Because the media give more attention to air accidents, we tend to overstate the risk of flying and understate the risk of driving.

Availability bias is our tendency to base judgments on readily available infor- mation. A combination of readily available information and our previous direct experience with similar information has a particularly strong impact on our decision making. Also, events that evoke emotions, are particularly vivid, or are more recent tend to be more available in our memory, leading us to overesti- mate the chances of unlikely events such as being in an airplane crash, suffer- ing complications from medical treatment, or getting fired.49 Availability bias can also explain why managers give more weight in performance appraisals to recent employee behaviors than to behaviors of 6 or 9 months earlier.50

escalation of commitment Another distortion that creeps into decisions is a tendency to escalate commitment, often for increasingly nonrational reasons.51 Escalation of commitment refers to our staying with a decision even if there is clear evidence it’s wrong. Consider a friend who has been dating someone for several years. Although he admits things aren’t going too well, he says he is still going to marry her. His justification: “I have a lot invested in the relationship!”

When is escalation most likely to occur? Evidence indicates it occurs when individuals view themselves as responsible for the outcome. The fear of per- sonal failure even biases the way we search for and evaluate information so that we choose only information that supports our dedication. It doesn’t appear to matter whether we chose the failing course of action or it was assigned to us—we feel responsible and escalate in either case. Also, the sharing of deci- sion authority—such as when others review the choice we made—can lead to higher escalation.52

We usually think of escalation of commitment as ungrounded. However, per- sistence in the face of failure is responsible for a great many of history’s greatest feats, the building of the Pyramids, the Great Wall of China, the Panama Canal, and the Empire State Building among them. Researchers suggest a balanced

confirmation bias The tendency to seek out information that reaffirms past choices and to discount information that contradicts past judgments.

availability bias The tendency for people to base their judgments on information that is readily available to them.

escalation of commitment An increased commitment to a previous decision in spite of negative information.

184 PART 2 The Individual

approach includes frequent evaluation of the spent costs and whether the next step is worth the anticipated costs.53 What we want to combat is thus the ten- dency to automatically escalate commitment.

randomness error Most of us like to think we have some control over our world. Our tendency to believe we can predict the outcome of random events is the randomness error.

Decision making suffers when we try to create meaning in random events, particularly when we turn imaginary patterns into superstitions.54 These can be completely contrived (“I never make important decisions on Friday the 13th”) or they can evolve from a reinforced past pattern of behavior (Tiger Woods often wears a red shirt during a golf tournament’s final round because he won many junior tournaments wearing red shirts). Decisions based on random occurrences can handicap us when they affect our judgment or bias our major decisions.

risk aversion Mathematically speaking, we should find a 50–50 flip of the coin for $100 to be worth as much as a sure promise of $50. After all, the expected value of the gamble over a number of trials is $50. However, nearly everyone but committed gamblers would rather have the sure thing than a risky prospect.55 For many people, a 50–50 flip of a coin even for $200 might not be worth as much as a sure promise of $50, even though the gamble is mathematically worth twice as much! This tendency to prefer a sure thing over a risky outcome is risk aversion.

Risk aversion has important implications. For example, to offset the inher- ent risk employees accept in a commission-based wage, companies may pay commissioned employees considerably more than they do those on straight sal- aries. Second, risk-averse employees will stick with the established way of doing their jobs rather than take a chance on innovative methods. Continuing with a strategy that has worked in the past minimizes risk, but it will lead to stagnation. Third, ambitious people with power that can be taken away (most managers) appear to be especially risk averse, perhaps because they don’t want to gamble with everything they’ve worked so hard to achieve.56 CEOs at risk of termination are exceptionally risk averse, even when a riskier investment strategy is in their firms’ best interests.57

Risk preference is sometimes reversed: People take chances when trying to prevent a negative outcome.58 They may thus risk losing a lot of money at trial rather than settle for less out of court. Stressful situations can make risk pref- erences stronger. People under stress will more likely engage in risk-seeking behavior to avoid negative outcomes, and risk-averse behavior in seeking posi- tive outcomes.59

Hindsight Bias Hindsight bias is the tendency to believe falsely, after the outcome is known, that we would have accurately predicted it.60 When we have feedback on the outcome, we seem good at concluding it was obvious.

For instance, the original home video rental industry, renting movies at brick-and-mortar stores, collapsed as online distribution outlets ate away at the market.61 Some have suggested that if rental companies like Blockbuster had leveraged their brand to offer online streaming and kiosks, they could have avoided failure. While that seems obvious now in hindsight, tempting us to think we would have predicted it, many experts failed to predict industry trends in advance. Though criticisms of decision makers may have merit, as Malcolm Gladwell, author of Blink and The Tipping Point, writes, “What is clear in hind- sight is rarely clear before the fact.”62

randomness error The tendency of individuals to believe that they can predict the outcome of random events.

risk aversion The tendency to prefer a sure gain of a moderate amount over a riskier outcome, even if the riskier outcome might have a higher expected payoff.

hindsight bias The tendency to believe falsely, after an outcome of an event is actually known, that one would have accurately predicted that outcome.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 185

We are all susceptible to biases like hindsight bias, but are we all susceptible to the same degree? It is not likely. Our individual differences play a significant role in our decision-making processes, while our organizations constrain the range of our available decision choices.

try It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: Decision Making.

Influences on Decision Making: Individual Differences and Organizational Constraints We turn here to factors that influence the way people make decisions and the degree to which they are susceptible to errors and biases. We discuss individual differences and then organizational constraints.

Individual Differences As we discussed, decision making in practice is characterized by bounded rationality, common biases and errors, and the use of intuition. Individual differences such as personality also create deviations from the rational model.

Personality Research suggests personality influences our decisions. Let’s look at conscientiousness and self-esteem.

Specific facets of conscientiousness—particularly achievement-striving and dutifulness—may affect escalation of commitment.63 First, achievement- oriented people hate to fail, so they escalate their commitment, hoping to forestall failure. Dutiful people, however, are more inclined to do what they see as best for the organization, so they are less likely to escalate their commitment. Second, achievement-striving individuals appear more susceptible to hindsight bias, perhaps because they have a need to justify their actions.64 We don’t have evidence yet on whether dutiful people are immune to this bias.

Self-esteem, or a general self-perception of being good enough, is a rather stable trait. People with high self-esteem are strongly motivated to maintain it, so they use the self-serving bias to preserve it. They blame others for their fail- ures while taking credit for successes.65

Gender Who makes better decisions, men or women? It depends on the situ- ation. When the situation isn’t stressful, decision making by men and women is about equal in quality. In stressful situations, it appears that men become more egocentric and make more risky decisions, while women become more empathetic and their decision making improves.66 Research on rumination, or reflecting at length, offers further insights into gender differences in decision making.67 Women spend more time than men analyzing the past, present, and future. They’re more likely to overanalyze problems before making a decision and to rehash a decision once made. This can make problems harder to solve, increase regret over past decisions, and increase depression. Women are nearly twice as likely as men to develop depression,68 but why women ruminate more than men is not clear. However, the gender difference seems to lessen with age. Differences are largest during young adulthood and smallest after age 65, when both men and women ruminate the least.69

6-5 Explain how individual differences and organiza- tional constraints affect decision making.

186 PART 2 The Individual

mental ability We know people with higher levels of mental ability are able to process information more quickly, solve problems more accurately, and learn faster, so you might expect them to be less susceptible to com- mon decision errors. However, mental ability appears to help people avoid only some of them.70 Smart people are just as likely to fall prey to anchor- ing, overconfidence, and escalation of commitment, probably because being smart doesn’t alert you to the possibility you’re too confident or emotionally defensive. It’s not that intelligence never matters. Once warned about decision-making errors, more intelligent people learn more quickly to avoid them.

cultural Differences The rational model makes no acknowledgment of cultural differences, nor does the bulk of OB research literature on decision making. But Indonesians, for instance, don’t necessarily make decisions the same way Australians do. Therefore, we need to recognize that the cultural background of a decision maker can significantly influence the selection of problems, the depth of analysis, the importance placed on logic and rationality, and whether organizational decisions should be made autocratically by an individual man- ager or collectively in groups.71

Cultures differ in time orientation, the value they place on rationality, their belief in the ability of people to solve problems, and their preference for collec- tive decision making. First, differences in time orientation help us understand, for instance, why managers in Egypt make decisions at a much slower and more deliberate pace than their U.S. counterparts. Second, while rationality is val- ued in North America, that’s not true elsewhere. A North American manager might make a decision intuitively but know it’s important to appear to proceed in a rational fashion because rationality is highly valued in the West. In coun- tries such as Iran, where rationality is not paramount to other factors, efforts to appear rational are not necessary.

Third, some cultures emphasize solving problems, while others focus on accepting situations as they are. The United States falls in the first category; Thailand and Indonesia are examples of the second. Because problem-solving managers believe they can and should change situations to their benefit, U.S. managers might identify a problem long before their Thai or Indonesian coun- terparts would choose to recognize it as such. Fourth, decision making in Japan is much more group-oriented than in the United States. The Japanese value conformity and cooperation, so before Japanese CEOs make an important deci- sion, they collect a large amount of information to use in consensus-forming group decisions.

Nudging Anyone who has ever seen a commercial knows about nudging. Commercials are one of the most outright forms of an organization’s attempt to influence our perceptions of a product and our decision to acquire that product. Nudging has also been used positively in the development of corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives to change people’s expectations for organiza- tions.72 People differ in their susceptibility to suggestion, but it is probably fair to say we are all receptive to nudging to some degree.

OB researchers are on the leading edge of figuring out how organizations can nudge individuals into better decision making.73 Nudging uses psychol- ogy to circumvent our natural negative tendencies. In organizations, nudging usually involves strategic placement of facts and resources that subtly suggest a better decision. For instance, organizations that automatically enroll employees in retirement plans have greater participation than those whose employees choose from many options, including not to enroll.74

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 187

organizational constraints Organizations can constrain decision makers, creating deviations from the rational model. For instance, managers shape decisions to reflect the organiza- tion’s performance evaluation and reward systems, to comply with formal regu- lations, and to meet organizationally imposed time constraints. Precedents can also limit decisions.

Performance evaluation systems Managers are influenced by the criteria on which they are evaluated. If a division manager believes the manufactur- ing plants under his responsibility are operating best when he hears nothing negative, the plant managers will spend a good part of their time ensuring that negative information doesn’t reach him.

reward systems The organization’s reward systems influence decision makers by suggesting which choices have better personal payoffs. If the organization rewards risk aversion, managers are more likely to make conservative deci- sions. For instance, for over half a century (the 1930s through the mid-1980s), General Motors consistently gave promotions and bonuses to managers who kept a low profile and avoided controversy. These executives became adept at dodging tough issues and passing controversial decisions on to committees, which harmed the organization over time.

formal regulations David, a shift manager at a Taco Bell restaurant in San Antonio, Texas, describes constraints he faces on his job: “I’ve got rules and regulations covering almost every decision I make—from how to make a burrito to how often I need to clean the restrooms. My job doesn’t come with much freedom of choice.” David’s situation is not unique. All but the smallest organizations create rules and policies to program decisions and get individuals to act in the intended manner. In doing so, they limit decision choices.

Manager Kely Guardado (center) prepares hamburgers alongside employees at a Five Guys Burger and Fries restaurant. Decision choices of Five Guys crew members are limited because workers are required to follow rules and regulations for food preparation that meet the firm’s high standards of quality, safety, and service. Source: Yuri Gripas/Reuters

188 PART 2 The Individual

system-Imposed time constraints Almost all important decisions come with explicit deadlines. For example, a report on new-product development may have to be ready for executive committee review by the first of the month. Such conditions often make it difficult, if not impossible, for managers to gather all information before making a final choice.

Historical Precedents Decisions aren’t made in a vacuum; they have context. Individual decisions are points in a stream of choices; those made in the past are like ghosts that haunt and constrain current choices. It’s common knowl- edge that the largest determinant of the size of any given year’s budget is last year’s budget. Choices made today are largely a result of choices made over the years.

What About Ethics in Decision Making? Ethical considerations should be important to all organizational decision making. In this section, we present three ways to frame decisions ethically and then address the important issue of the effect of lying on decision making.

three ethical Decision criteria The first ethical yardstick is utilitarianism, which proposes making decisions solely on the basis of their outcomes, ideally to provide the greatest good for the greatest number.75 This view dominates business decision making and is consistent with goals such as efficiency, productivity, and high profits. Keep in mind that utilitarianism is not always as objective as it sounds. A recent study indicated that the ethicality of utilitarianism is influenced in ways we don’t realize. Participants were given a moral dilemma: The weight of five people bends a footbridge so it is low to some train tracks. A train is about to hit the bridge. The choice is to let all five people perish, or push the one heavy man off the bridge to save four people. In the United States, South Korea, France, and Israel, 20 percent of respondents chose to push the man off the bridge, in Spain, 18 percent, and in Korea, none. These might speak to cultural utilitar- ian values, but a minor change, asking people to answer in a non-native lan- guage they knew, caused more participants to push the man overboard: in one group, 33 percent pushed the man, and in another group 44 percent did.76 The emotional distance of answering in a non-native language thus seemed to foster a utilitarian viewpoint. It appears that even our view of what we consider pragmatic is changeable.

Another ethical criterion is to make decisions consistent with fundamental liberties and privileges, as set forth in documents such as the U.S. Bill of Rights. An emphasis on rights in decision making means respecting and protecting the basic rights of individuals, such as the right to privacy, free speech, and due process. This criterion protects whistle-blowers77 when they reveal an organiza- tion’s unethical practices to the press or government agencies, using their right to free speech.

A third criterion is to impose and enforce rules fairly and impartially to ensure justice or an equitable distribution of benefits and costs.78 Justice perspectives are sometimes used to justify paying people the same wage for a given job regardless of performance differences and using seniority as the primary determinant in layoff decisions.

Decision makers, particularly in for-profit organizations, feel com- fortable with utilitarianism. The “best interests” of the organization and

6-6 Contrast the three ethical decision criteria.

utilitarianism A system in which decisions are made to provide the greatest good for the greatest number.

whistle-blowers Individuals who report unethical practices by their employer to outsiders.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 189

its stockholders can justify a lot of questionable actions, such as large layoffs. But many critics feel this perspective needs to change. Public con- cern about individual rights and social justice suggests managers should develop ethical  standards based on nonutilitarian criteria. This presents a challenge because satisfying individual rights and social justice creates far more ambiguities than utilitarian effects on efficiency and profits. How- ever, while raising prices, selling products with questionable effects on con- sumer health, closing down inefficient plants, laying off large numbers of employees, and moving production overseas to cut costs can be justified in utilitarian terms, there may no longer be a single measure by which good decisions are judged.

This is where corporate social responsibility (CSR) comes in to affect a posi- tive change. As we can see by looking at utilitarian ideals, organizations are not motivated to respond equitably when they are looking only at a balance sheet. However, public pressure on organizations to behave responsibly has meant sustainability issues now affect the bottom line: Consumers increasingly choose to purchase goods and services from organizations with effective CSR initia- tives, high performers are attracted to work at CSR organizations, governments offer incentives to organizations for sustainability efforts, and so forth. CSR is now beginning to make good business sense, folding ethics into utilitarian computations.

Increasingly, researchers are turning to behavioral ethics—an area of study that analyzes how people behave when confronted with ethical dilemmas. Their research tells us that while ethical standards exist collectively in societies and organizations, and individually in the form of personal ethics, we do not always follow ethical standards promoted by our organizations, and we sometimes violate our own standards. Our ethical behavior varies widely from one situation to the next.

How might we increase ethical decision making in organizations? First, soci- ologist James Q. Wilson promulgated the broken windows theory—the idea that decayed and disorderly urban environments may facilitate criminal behavior because they signal antisocial norms. Although controversial, the theory does fit with behavioral ethics research showing that seemingly superficial aspects of the environment—such as lighting, outward displays of wealth and status, and cleanliness—can affect ethical behavior in organizations.79 Managers must first realize that ethical behavior can be affected by signals; for example, if signs of status and money are everywhere, an employee may perceive those, rather than ethical standards, to be of the highest importance. Second, man- agers should encourage conversations about moral issues; they may serve as a reminder and increase ethical decision making. One study found that simply asking business school students to think of an ethical situation had powerful effects when they were making ethical choices later.80 Finally, we should be aware of our own moral “blind spots”—the tendency to see ourselves as more moral than we are and others as less moral than they are. An environment that encourages open discussions and does not penalize people for coming forward is key to overcoming blind spots and increasing the ethicality of deci- sion making.81

Behavioral ethics research stresses the importance of culture to ethical decision making. There are few global standards for ethical decision making,82 as contrasts between Asia and the West illustrate. What is ethical in one culture may be unethical in another. For example, because bribery is more common in countries such as China, a Canadian working in China might face a dilemma: Should I pay a bribe to secure business if it is an accepted part of that country’s culture? Although some companies, such as

behavioral ethics Analyzing how people actually behave when confronted with ethical dilemmas.

190 PART 2 The Individual

IBM, explicitly address this issue, many do not. Without sensitivity to cultural differences as part of the definition of ethical conduct, organizations may encourage unethical conduct without even knowing it.

lying Are you a liar? Many of us would not like to be labeled as a liar. But if a liar is merely someone who lies, we are all liars. We lie to ourselves, and we lie to others. We lie consciously and unconsciously. We tell big lies and create small deceptions. Lying is one of the top unethical activities we may indulge in daily, and it undermines all efforts toward sound decision making.

The truth is that one of the reasons we lie is because lying is difficult for others to detect. In more than 200 studies, individuals correctly identified people who were lying only 47 percent of the time, which is less than random picking.83 This seems to be true no matter what lie-detection technique is employed. For example, one technique police officers use is based on the theory that people look up and to the right when they lie. Unfortunately, researchers who tested the technique could not substantiate the underlying theory.84

Another technique is to study a person’s body language, but researchers found that the probability of detecting lying based solely on body language was less than a random guess. Psychologist Maria Hartwig observed, “The common- sense notion that liars betray themselves through body language appears to be little more than a cultural fiction.”85 Still another technique is to study facial expressions. Here again, many researchers could not support the technique with evidence. Research professor Nicholas Epley concluded, “Reading people’s expressions can give you a little information, but you can get so much more just by talking to them.”86

What about our words? Liars may indeed give verbal cues, but which cues apply to which people is a matter of debate. Whether liars tell better stories, or conversely give fewer details, is not certain. Law enforcers analyze an individual’s words, looking for emphatic or repeated phrases to indicate lying. Detecting lies from our written words is even trickier since there are fewer cues. However, that doesn’t stop lie-detection speculation for written communications. Some say that in e-mail messages, liars omit personal pronouns, use noncommittal expressions, change tenses, skip topics, provide too much detail, or add qualifying statements.87 Yet a person who regularly does those things when writing may not be lying.

The best hope for lie detection is to read a combination of cues unique to the person. Perhaps it is true that a mother can sometimes tell when her child is lying, for instance, because the mother knows how the child changes his behav- ior when he’s stressed. Thus, although we may feel that our lying is “written all over our face,” as Epley says, “The mind comes through the mouth.”88 Lie detection is also easier if the person is a bad liar without a lot of experience. According to Tyler Cohen Wood of the Defense Intelligence Agency’s Science and Technology Directorate, “The majority of people prefer to tell the truth. That’s why when they are lying, the truth is going to leak out.”89 Finally, research indicates that while we do not consciously discern lying in others, we are able to sense on some level when lying is happening.90

Lying is deadly to decision making, whether we sense the lies or not. Managers—and organizations—simply cannot make good decisions when facts are misrepresented and people give false motives for their behaviors. Lying is a big ethical problem as well. From an organizational perspective, using fancy lie-detection techniques and entrapping liars when possible yield unreliable results.91 The most lasting solution comes from organizational behavior, which studies ways to prevent lying by working with our natural propensities to create environments non-conducive to lying.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 191

Creativity, Creative Decision Making, and Innovation in Organizations Models will often improve our decisions, but a decision maker also needs creativity, the ability to produce novel and useful ideas. Novel ideas are different from what’s been done before but which are appropriate for the problem.

Creativity allows the decision maker to fully appraise and understand prob- lems, including seeing problems others can’t see. Although all aspects of orga- nizational behavior are complex, that is especially true for creativity. To simplify, Exhibit 6-5 provides a three-stage model of creativity in organizations. The core of the model is creative behavior, which has both causes (predictors of creative behavior) and effects (outcomes of creative behavior). In this section, we discuss the three stages of creativity, starting with the center, creative behavior.

creative Behavior Creative behavior occurs in four steps, each of which leads to the next92:

1. Problem formulation. Any act of creativity begins with a problem that the behavior is designed to solve. Thus, problem formulation is the stage

6-7 Describe the three-stage model of creativity. creativity The ability to produce novel and useful ideas.

three-stage model of creativity The proposition that creativity involves three stages: causes (creative potential and creative environment), creative behavior, and creative outcomes (innovation).

problem formulation The stage of creative behavior that involves identifying a problem or opportunity requiring a solution that is as yet unknown.

Mark Twain wrote, “The wise thing is for us diligently to train our-selves to lie thoughtfully.” Not everyone agrees that lying is wrong. But we probably agree that people do lie, in- cluding each of us, to varying degrees. And most of us probably agree that if we lied less, organizations and soci- ety would be better off. So how might that be done? Research conducted by behavioral scientists suggests some steps to recovery.

1. Stop lying to ourselves. We lie to our- selves about how much we lie. Spe- cifically, many studies reveal that we deem ourselves much less likely to lie than we judge others to be. At a collective level, this is impossible— everyone can’t be below above aver- age in their propensity to lie. So step 1 is to admit the truth: We underesti- mate the degree to which we lie, we overestimate our morality compared

to that of others, and we tend to en- gage in “moral hypocrisy”—we think we’re more moral than we are.

2. Trust, but verify. Lying is learned at a very young age. When a toy was placed out of view, an experimenter told young children not to look at the toy and went out of sight. More than 80 percent of the children looked at the toy. When asked whether they had looked, 25 percent of 2½-year- olds lied, compared to 90 percent of 4-year-olds. Why do we learn to lie? Because we often get away with it. Negotiation research shows that we are more likely to lie in the fu- ture when our lies have succeeded or gone undetected in the past. Managers need to eliminate situa- tions in which lying is available to employees.

3. Reward honesty. “The most difficult thing is to recognize that sometimes

we too are blinded by our own in- centives,” writes author Dan Ariely, “because we don’t see how our con- flicts of interest work on us.” So if we want more honesty, we have to provide greater incentives for the truth, and more disincentives for lying and cheating.

Sources: Based on D. Ariely, The Honest Truth about Dishonesty: How We Lie to Everyone—and Especially Ourselves (New York: Harper, 2012); K. Canavan, “Even Nice People Cheat Sometimes,” The Wall  Street Journal, August 8, 2012, 4B; M.  H.  Bazerman and Ann E. Tenbrunsel, Blind Spots: Why We Fail to Do What’s Right and What to Do about It (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012); A. D. Evans and K. Lee, “Emergence of Lying in Very Young Children,” Developmental Psy- chology (2013); and L. Zhou, Y. Sung, and D. Zhang, “Deception Performance in On- line Group Negotiation and Decision Mak- ing: The Effects of Deception Experience and Deception Skill,” Group Decision and Negotiation 22 (2013): 153–72.

choosing to Lie an ethical choice

192 PART 2 The Individual

of creative behavior in which we identify a problem or opportunity that requires a solution as yet unknown. For example, Marshall Carbee and John Bennett founded Eco Safety Products after discovering that even paints declared safe by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emitted hazardous chemical compounds. Thus, Eco’s development of artist-safe soy-based paint began with identifying a safety problem with paints currently on the market.93

2. Information gathering. Given a problem, the solution is rarely directly at hand. We need time to learn more and to process that learning. Thus, information gathering is the stage of creative behavior when knowledge is sought and possible solutions to a problem incubate in an individual’s mind. Information gathering leads us to identifying innovation opportuni- ties.94 Niklas Laninge of Hoa’s Tool Shop, a Stockholm-based company that helps organizations become more innovative, argues that creative informa- tion gathering means thinking beyond usual routines and comfort zones. For example, have lunch with someone outside your field to discuss the problem. “It’s so easy, and you’re forced to speak about your business and the things that you want to accomplish in new terms. You can’t use buzz- words because people don’t know what you mean,” Laninge says.95

3. Idea generation. Idea generation is the process of creative behavior in which we develop possible solutions to a problem from relevant information and knowledge. Sometimes we do this alone, when tricks like taking a walk96 and doodling97 can jumpstart the process. Increasingly, though, idea genera- tion is collaborative. For example, when NASA engineers developed the idea for landing a spacecraft on Mars, they did so collaboratively. Before coming up with the Curiosity—an SUV-sized rover that lands on Mars from a sky crane—the team spent 3 days scribbling potential ideas on whiteboards.98

4. Idea evaluation. Finally, it’s time to choose from the ideas we have gen- erated. Thus, idea evaluation is the process of creative behavior in which we evaluate potential solutions to identify the best one. Sometimes the method of choosing can be innovative. When Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban was unhappy with the team’s uniforms, he asked fans to help design and choose the best uniform. Cuban said, “What’s the best way to come up with creative ideas? You ask for them. So we are going to crowd source the design and colors of our uniforms.”99 Generally, you want those who evaluate ideas to be different from those who generate them, to eliminate the obvious biases.

information gathering The stage of creative behavior when possible solutions to a problem incubate in an individual’s mind.

idea generation The process of creative behavior that involves developing possible solutions to a problem from relevant information and knowledge.

idea evaluation The process of creative behavior involving the evaluation of potential solutions to problems to identify the best one.

three-stage model of creativity in organizationsExhibit 6-5

Creative outcomes (Innovation)

Novelty Usefulness

Creative behavior

Problem formulation Information gathering Idea generation Idea evaluation

Causes of creative behavior

Creative potential Creative environment

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 193

causes of creative Behavior Having defined creative behavior, the main stage in the three-stage model, we now look back to the causes of creativity: creative potential and creative environment.

creative Potential Is there such a thing as a creative personality? Indeed. While creative genius is rare—whether in science (Stephen Hawking), performing arts (Martha Graham), or business (Steve Jobs)—most people have some of the characteristics shared by exceptionally creative people. The more of these characteristics we have, the higher our creative potential. Innovation is one of the top organizational goals for leaders (see OB Poll). Consider these facets of potential:

1. Intelligence and Creativity Intelligence is related to creativity. Smart people are more creative because they are better at solving complex prob- lems. However, intelligent individuals may also be more creative because they have greater “working memory,” that is, they can recall more informa- tion related to the task at hand.100 Along the same lines, recent research in the Netherlands indicates that an individual’s high need for cognition (desire to learn) is correlated with greater creativity.101

2. Personality and Creativity The Big Five personality trait of openness to experience (see Chapter 5) correlates with creativity, probably because open individuals are less conformist in action and more divergent in think- ing.102 Other traits of creative people include proactive personality, self-con- fidence, risk taking, tolerance for ambiguity, and perseverance.103 Hope, self-efficacy (belief in your capabilities), and positive affect also predict an individual’s creativity.104 Furthermore, research in China suggests that people with high core self-evaluations are better able than others to main- tain creativity in negative situations.105 Perhaps counterintuitively, some research supports the “mad genius” theory that some people with mental illness are wildly creative partially due to their psychopathology; history cer- tainly provides examples, such as Vincent Van Gogh, John Forbes Nash, and

Ob POLL is innovation More talk than show?

Source: Based on T. Henneman, “Bright Ideas,” Workforce Management (January 2013), 18–25.

Developing leaders

30% 35% 40% 45% 50% 55%

51.6%

Retaining talent 46.1%

Recruiting talent

Containing costs 35.5%

Fostering innovation

When asked to identify their top three goals for the upcoming year, percentage of leaders who ranked goals listed below in one of their top three

37.6%

34.0%

37.6%

34.0%

194 PART 2 The Individual

others. However, the converse isn’t true—people who are creative may have less psychopathology as a group than the general population.106

3. Expertise and Creativity Expertise is the foundation for all creative work and thus is the single most important predictor of creative potential. Film writer, producer, and director Quentin Tarantino spent his youth working in a video rental store, where he built up an encyclopedic knowledge of movies. The potential for creativity is enhanced when individuals have abilities, knowledge, proficiencies, and similar expertise to their field of endeavor. For instance, you wouldn’t expect someone with minimal knowledge of programming to be very creative as a software engineer. The expertise of others is important, too. People with larger social networks have greater exposure to diverse ideas and informal access to the expertise and resources of others.107

4. Ethics and Creativity Although creativity is linked to many desirable indi- vidual characteristics, it is not correlated with ethicality. People who cheat may actually be more creative than those who behave ethically, according to recent research. It may be that dishonesty and creativity can both stem from a rule-breaking desire.108

PErsonAl InvEnTory AssEssmEnTs how creative are you? Everyone is innovative, to some degree. Take this PIA to find out if you are wildly or mildly creative.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

creative environment Most of us have creative potential we can learn to apply, but as important as creative potential is, by itself it is not enough. We need to be in an environment where creative potential can be realized. What environmen- tal factors affect whether creative potential translates into creative behaviors?

First and perhaps most important is motivation. If you aren’t motivated to be creative, it is unlikely you will be. Intrinsic motivation, or the desire to work on something because it’s interesting, exciting, satisfying, and challenging (discussed in more detail in the next chapter), correlates fairly strongly with creative outcomes.109

It is also valuable to work in an environment that rewards and recognizes creative work. A study of health care teams found that team creativity trans- lated into innovation only when the climate actively supported innovation.110 The organization should foster the free flow of ideas, including providing fair and constructive judgment. Freedom from excessive rules encourages creativity; employees should have the freedom to decide what work is to be done and how to do it. One study in China revealed that both structural empowerment (in which the structure of the work unit allows sufficient employee freedom) and psychological empowerment (which lets the individual feel personally enabled to decide) were related to employee creativity.111 However, research in Slovenia found that creating a competitive climate where achievement at any cost is val- ued will stymie creativity.112

You may be wondering about the link between organizational resources and creativity. While it is said that “necessity is the mother of invention,” recent research indicates that creativity can be inspired by an abundance of resources as well. It appears that managers greatly affect the outcomes. They may be able to heighten innovation when resources are limited by encouraging employees to find resources for their novel ideas, and by giving direct attention

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 195

to appropriate tools when resources are plentiful.113 Managers also serve an important bridge role for knowledge transfer. When managers link teams to additional information and resources, radical creativity (introducing creative ideas that break the status quo) is more likely.114 The weaker ties between team members and manager networks may actually have more impact on creativity than the direct, stronger ties that team members have with their own networks, because the weaker sources provide more divergent thinking.115

What is the role of culture? A recent nation-level study suggests that countries scoring high on Hofstede’s culture dimension of individuality (see Chapter 5) are more creative.116 Western countries like the United States, Italy, and Bel- gium score high on individuality, and South American and eastern countries like China, Colombia, and Pakistan score low. Does this mean Western cultures are more creative? Some evidence suggests this is true. One study compared the creative projects of German and Chinese college students, some of whom were studying in their homeland, and some of whom were studying abroad. An independent panel of Chinese and German judges determined that the German students were most creative and that Asian German students were more  creative than domestic Chinese students. This suggested the German culture was more creative.117 However, even if some cultures are more creative on average, there is always strong variation within cultures. Put another way, there are millions of Chinese more creative than their U.S. counterparts.

Good leadership matters to creativity too. One study of more than 100 teams working in a large bank revealed that when the leader behaved in a punitive, unsupportive manner, the teams were less creative.118 On the other hand, when leaders are encouraging in tone, run their units in a transparent fashion, and encourage the development of their employees, the individuals they supervise are more creative.119

As we will learn in Chapter 10, more work today is being done in teams, and many people believe diversity will increase team creativity. Past research has suggested that diverse teams are not more creative. More recently, however, one study of Dutch teams revealed that when team members were explicitly asked to understand and consider the point of view of the other team mem- bers (an exercise called perspective-taking), diverse teams were more creative than those with less diversity.120 Leadership might make the difference. One study of 68 Chinese teams reported that diversity was positively related to team creativity only when the team’s leader was inspirational and instilled members with confidence.121

There are other worthwhile findings regarding creativity. One study in a multinational drug company found that teams from diverse business functions were more creative when they shared knowledge of each other’s areas of exper- tise.122 However, if team members have a similar background, creativity may be heightened only when the members are sharing specific, detailed informa- tion,123 since general information may be dismissed by members with the same expertise. As you might expect, newcomers to a team can be a rich source of creative ideas, although they are unfortunately often expected to contribute less early on.124 Putting individuals who are resistant to change into teams that are supportive of change can increase total creativity,125 perhaps because of the group’s positive influence. Collectively, these studies show that diverse teams can be more creative, especially if they are intentionally led.

creative outcomes (Innovation) The final stage in our model of creativity is the outcome. Creative behavior does not always produce an innovative outcome. An employee might generate a creative idea and never share it. Management might reject a creative solution.

196 PART 2 The Individual

Teams might squelch creative behaviors by isolating those who propose differ- ent ideas. One study showed that most people have a bias against accepting cre- ative ideas because ideas create uncertainty. When people feel uncertain, their ability to see any idea as creative is blocked.126

We can define creative outcomes as ideas or solutions judged to be novel and useful by relevant stakeholders. Novelty itself does not generate a creative out- come if it isn’t useful. Thus, “off-the-wall” solutions are creative only if they help solve the problem. The usefulness of the solution might be self-evident (the iPad), or it might be considered successful by only the stakeholders initially.127

An organization may harvest many creative ideas from its employees and call itself innovative. However, as one expert stated, “Ideas are useless unless used.” Soft skills help translate ideas into results. One researcher found that in a large agribusiness company, creative ideas were most likely to be implemented when an individual was motivated to translate the idea into practice—and had strong networking ability.128 These studies highlight an important fact: Creative ideas do not implement themselves; translating them into creative outcomes is a social process that requires utilizing other concepts addressed in this text, including power and politics, leadership, and motivation.

Summary Individuals base their behavior not on the way their external environment actu- ally is, but rather on the way they see it or believe it to be. An understanding of the way people make decisions can help us explain and predict behavior, but few important decisions are simple or unambiguous enough for the rational model’s assumptions to apply. We find individuals looking for solutions that satisfice rather than optimize, injecting biases and prejudices into the deci- sion process, and relying on intuition. Managers should encourage creativity in employees and teams to create a route to innovative decision making.

Implications for Managers ●● Behavior follows perception, so to influence behavior at work, assess how

people perceive their work. Often behaviors we find puzzling can be explained by understanding the initiating perceptions.

●● Make better decisions by recognizing perceptual biases and decision- making errors we tend to commit. Learning about these problems doesn’t always prevent us from making mistakes, but it does help.

●● Adjust your decision-making approach to the national culture you’re operating in and to the criteria your organization values. If you’re in a country that doesn’t value rationality, don’t feel compelled to follow the decision-making model or to try to make your decisions appear rational. Adjust your decision approach to ensure compatibility with the organiza- tional culture.

●● Combine rational analysis with intuition. These are not conflicting approaches to decision making. By using both, you can actually improve your decision-making effectiveness.

●● Try to enhance your creativity. Actively look for novel solutions to problems, attempt to see problems in new ways, use analogies, and hire creative talent. Try to remove work and organizational barriers that might impede creativity.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 197

stereotypes are Dying

I n the Myth or Science? feature in this chapter, we discussed the harmful effects of stereotypes, even positive ones. Fortunately, stereotypes are dying a slow but inexorable death. Whether they are about women, racial or ethnic minorities, or those of minority sex- ual orientations, each passing year brings evidence that stereotypes are losing their hold—thanks to the progress of society, but also thanks to younger individuals replacing older ones in the workforce. younger people are less likely to endorse stereotypes across the board.

In the 1930s, when asked whether African Americans were “super- stitious,” 84 percent agreed; 75 percent endorsed a stereotype that African Americans were “lazy.” Thankfully, those stereotypes are nearly gone. results vary by study, but today between 0 and 10 percent of individuals agree with those stereotypes. These results show that rac- ism still exists, but they also show it is waning.

Even when people endorse stereotypes, their consensus has weak- ened dramatically over time. For example, if forced to choose 10 ad- jectives to describe a group of people, at one time people converged on a few (often incorrect) traits. Today, the lists will vary dramatically by person.

There is another factor at play here: the media. media reports are not a good source of scientific information, yet to listen to them, you’d think stereotypes were as alive as ever. Fortunately, that’s not the case, but when stereotypes fade, it’s not newsworthy. someday soon, stereotypic thinking will be as retrograde as outright acts of racism or sexism. We should count ourselves lucky to live in societies and work in organizations where such thinking and behavior are viewed quite negatively.

PoInT

Unfortunately, stereotypes are alive and well. We may have just become better at hiding them. People conceal negative stereotypes in favor of emphasizing positive ones, especially when communicating publicly (to a casual acquaintance) rather than privately (to a close friend). When someone communicates a negative stereotype, listeners think less of the communicator, even when they agree. research shows that people do not communicate their negative stereotypes to others because they know that expressing stereotypes may make them look bad.

We cannot assume that unspoken stereotypes are benign. A preju- dice unexpressed is no less a prejudice. negative stereotypes don’t magically reverse themselves over time. Thankfully, positive stereo- types help to balance out the equation a little bit, and negative stereo- types can change when they are openly refuted. For example, nearly half (48.9 percent) of individuals describe Italians as “passionate”— and that has remained stable over time—whereas only 1.5 percent now describe them as “cowardly”—which declined greatly over time.

The decline of a few negative stereotypes may seem like progress, but it’s less than it seems. All stereotypes are undesirable, positive stereotypes beget negative ones, and the negative ones haven’t gone away; they’ve just been driven underground. We can only really hope to eliminate stereotypes by addressing them openly. When such preju- dices are concealed, they are harder to change.

Time and the entrance of younger individuals into society and organizations have not eliminated or necessarily even reduced stereo- types. Ironically, even the assertion that younger workers are less likely to hold stereotypes than older ones relies on a stereotype (that older people are more likely to be prejudiced)!

CounTerPoInT

Sources: J. l. skorinko and s. A. sinclair, “Perspective Taking Can Increase stereotyping: The role of Apparent stereotype Confirmation,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49 (2013): 10–18; and H. B. Bergsieker, l. m. leslie, v. s. Constantine, and s. T. Fiske, “stereotyping by omission: Eliminate the negative, Accentuate the Positive,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 1214–38.

198 PART 2 The Individual

chaPter review

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QuestiOns fOr review

6-1 What are the factors that influence our perception?

6-2 What is attribution theory? 6-3 What is the link between perception and decision making?

6-4 How is the rational model of decision making different from bounded rationality and intuition?

6-5 How do individual differences and organizational constraints influence decision making?

6-6 What are the three ethical decision criteria, and how do they differ?

6-7 What are the parts of the three-stage model of creativity?

exPerientiaL exercise Good Liars and Bad Liars Break the class into groups of three (this exercise can be adjusted for groups of four). Have each student write down four statements about themselves—three should be truths, and one should be a lie. The lie should not be ob- vious; each student’s objective is to sell the lie as a truth along with the actual truths.

Going around the circle, each student states the truths and the lie. The group may ask a maximum of two follow- up questions for each statement. Then the group votes on each of the statements: truth or lie? The student can finally reveal the lie after everyone has voted.

After everyone in the circle has taken a turn, the group answers the following questions:

6-8. How many of the lies were detected? Were they easy or difficult to detect?

6-9. What made you think a statement was a lie: was it the probability of the statement itself, or the delivery by the student?

6-10. Do you think it is possible to be a good liar? What factors would a good liar have to control in order to pass off a lie as truth?

ethicaL DiLeMMa Cheating Is a Decision We all have cheated at something. We may think that deciding to cheat is a product of cold calculation: Is the benefit worth the cost? In some cases, this appears to be true—a recent study found that students who are studying in a non-native language, who believe they would obtain a lower grade, and who prefer risk are more likely to buy essays. They are more likely to resist, however, when they think they may be caught and when the penalty is high. In other cases, cheating is less of a conscious decision than expected. Here are some realities of cheating:

1. Cheating isn’t a cash deal. People would rather take things than cash.

2. Cheating is contagious. When we see others cheat, we are more likely to do it ourselves.

3. Moods affect cheating. People cheat more when they are angry or tired.

4. Incentives to cheat do work. If the goals are obtainable only through cheating, people will likely cheat more.

5. People like to cheat in secret. When people can be out of sight, they tend to cheat more.

Thankfully, knowledge of OB can help limit cheating incidents. For example, one recent study suggests that heightened enthusiasm in leaders may curb followers’ tendency to cheat. Making certain that people real- ize there is an ethical aspect to their decisions reduces cheating, as does monitoring people in performance settings.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 199

Questions 6-11. Do you know classmates who have cheated in

school? Have you ever cheated? 6-12. The authors of one study noted that people feel

they don’t need to be objective in evaluating poten- tial cheaters. Do you agree? Why or why not?

6-13. Do you think that if we admitted it to ourselves when we cheated, we would be less likely to cheat in the future? Why or why not?

Sources: E. B. Beasley, “Students Reported for Cheating Explain What They Think Would Have Stopped Them,” Ethics and Behavior 24, no. 3 (2014): 229–52; J. Chen, T. L.-P. Tang, and N. Tang, “Temptation, Monetary Intelligence (Love of Money), and Environmental Context on Unethi- cal Intentions and Cheating,” Journal of Business Ethics 123, no. 2 (2014): 197–219; M. N. Karim, S. E. Kaminsky, and T. S. Behrend, “Cheating, Reactions, and Performance in Remotely Proctored Testing: An Exploratory Experimental Study,” Journal of Business and Psychology 29, no. 4 (2014): 555–72; G. Orosz, I. Toth-Kiraly, B. Boethe, A. Kusztor, Z. U. Kovacs, and M. Janvari, “Teacher Enthusiasm: A Potential Cure of Academic Cheating,” Frontiers in Psychology 6 (2015): UNSP 318; D. Rigby, M. Burton, K. Balcombe, I. Bateman, and A. Mulatu, “Contract Cheating and the Market in Essays,” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 111 (2015): 23–37; and M. H. Bazerman and A. E. Tenbrunsel, Blind Spots: Why We Fail to Do What’s Right and What to Do about It (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012).

case inciDent 1 Too Much of a Good Thing Have you created an e-portfolio for job applications? If you attend the University of Massachusetts, the University of South Florida, Stanford, Marquette, or Westminster Col- lege, where e-portfolios are expected, you probably have developed one. E-portfolios—digitized dossiers of presen- tations, projects, writing samples, and other work—are used by over 50 percent of students looking for jobs or internships. Putting together an e-portfolio is “a learning experience, linked to a career opportunity,” said Associate Professor Tim Shea, who oversees a business school’s man- datory e-portfolio program.

Proponents contend that e-portfolios don’t replace résu- més, they enhance them. “You can write on a résumé that you did an internship somewhere, but if I can see the proj- ects that you worked on, it gives me a more rounded view of the candidate,” said Greg Haller, president of the western U.S. region for Verizon Wireless. Student Inga Zakradze agrees, saying the e-portfolio gives “a better feel for me as a well-rounded student.” And in a recent Association of American Colleges and Universities survey, 83 percent of respondents believed an e-portfolio would be useful.

With all this affirmation, you might think an e-portfolio is critical to obtaining a job, but that would be a misper- ception. Other than Haller, opinions seem divided: schools like students to make e-portfolios, but employers don’t want them. One of the reasons is technological—HR screening software doesn’t allow for links to websites where

e-portfolios would be stored. Portfolio hubs Pathbrite and thePortfolium have tried to get around this problem, but they have yet to obtain a single corporate contract. Another reason is information overload—managers don’t have time to read through, say, your travel log from a semester at sea. Third, many companies don’t believe e-portfolios are val- ue-added. “They are typically not a factor in our screening process,” said Enterprise talent acquisition VP Marie Artim. Stuart Silverman, a university dean, acknowledged the pos- sibility. “Whether or not the prospective employer looked at it, or weighed it, who knows.”

Proponents of e-portfolios, primarily from the education sector, believe there is value in them beyond job seeking. Kerri Shaffer Carter, a university director of e-portfolios, says, “We don’t draw a sharp distinction between the portfolio as a learning process and the portfolio as an employment tool, since the self-awareness that comes out of that process ulti- mately prepares the student for the workplace.” Just don’t expect all that hard work to land you a job.

Questions 6-14. How might the misperception about the impor-

tance of having an e-portfolio have begun? 6-15. What are the reasons you would decide to use an

e-portfolio? 6-16. What do you think would be the best way to deliver

an e-portfolio to a prospective employer?

Sources: “Global Digital Positioning Systems: E-Portfolios in a Digital Age,” 2015 Forum on Digital Learning and E-Portfolios, January 24, 2015, Association of American Colleges and Universi- ties, https://www.aacu.org/meetings/annualmeeting/AM15/eportfolioforum; M. Korn, “Giant Resumes Fail to Impress,” The Wall Street Journal, February 6, 2014, B7; G. Lorenzo and J. Ittelson, “An Overview of E-Portfolios,” Educause Learning Initiative, July 2005, https://net.educause.edu/ ir/library/pdf/eli3001.pdf, accessed May 7, 2015.

200 PART 2 The Individual

case inciDent 2 The Youngest Billionaire Picture this. The billionaire owner and founder stands in the conference room trying on bras while the CEO stands behind her, adjusting the straps. The floor is lit- tered with underwear. The owner takes off one bra and puts on another. Five executives in the conference room barely blink.

Welcome to Sara Blakely’s company, Spanx. In just a few years, Spanx became to slimming underwear what Jello is to gelatin and Kleenex is to facial tissue: So dominant that its name is synonymous with the industry.

At 44, Blakely is one of the youngest billionaires in the world. Like many stories of entrepreneurial success, hers is part gritty determination, part inspiration, and part circumstance. The grit was easy to see early on. As a child growing up in Clearwater Beach, Florida, she lured friends into doing her chores by setting up a competition. At 16, Blakely was so intent on success that she listened to self-help guru Wayne Dyer’s recordings incessantly. Friends refused to ride in her car. “No! She’s going to make us listen to that motivational crap!” Blakely recalls they said.

After twice failing to get into law school, Blakely started her first business in 1990, running a kids’ club at the Clear- water Beach Hilton. It worked until the Hilton’s general manager found out. Later, while working full-time in sales, Blakely began learning how to start a more viable business. Her inspiration for Spanx came while she was cold-calling customers as a sales manager for an office supply company. She hated pantyhose. “It’s Florida, it’s hot, I’m carrying copy machines,” she noted.

At the Georgia Tech library, Blakely researched every pantyhose patent ever filed. She wrote her patent applica- tion by following a textbook she read in Barnes & Noble.

Then she worked on marketing, manufacturing, and fi- nancing, treating each as its own project. After numerous rejections, she finally found mill owners in North Carolina willing to finance the manufacturing. “At the end of the day, the guy ended up just wanting to help me,” Blakely said. “He didn’t even believe in the idea.”

For a time, Blakely relied on stores like Neiman Marcus to set up her table and on word of mouth to get the news out to the public. Her big break came when she sent sam- ples to Oprah Winfrey’s stylist. Harpo Productions called to say that Winfrey would name Spanx her favorite product of the year and warned Blakely to get her website ready. She didn’t have a website.

Billions of dollars in sales later, Blakely has no plans to slow down. Spanx is sold in 55 countries, and Blakely wants to double international sales. She says: “The big- gest risk in life is not risking. Every risk you take in life is in direct proportion to the reward. If I’m afraid of some- thing, it’s the next thing I have to go do. That’s just the way I’ve been.”

Questions 6-17. How much of Blakely’s success is due to her per-

sonality and effort and how much to serendipity (being in the right place at the right time)? Does attribution theory help you answer this question? Why or why not?

6-18. Does hindsight bias affect the factors to which you might attribute Blakely’s success? Why or why not?

6-19. Use the three-stage model of creativity to analyze Blakely’s decision making. What can you learn from her story that might help you be more creative in the future?

Sources: Based on J. Mulkerrins, “All Spanx to Sara,” Daily Mail, April 6, 2013, downloaded May 7, 2013, from www.dailymail.co.uk/home/; C. O’Connor, “American Booty,” Forbes, March 26, 2012, 172–78; and R. Tulshyan, “Spanx’s Sara Blakely: Turning $5,000 into $1 Billion with Panties,” CNN.com, December 5, 2012, http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/04/business/sara-blakely-spanx-underwear/.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 201

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

6-20. In relation to Case Incident 1, how do you think more employers’ dim view of e-portfolios can be changed? 6-21. Consider Case Incident 2, the chapter-opening story, and the chapter. Do you think creativity is “born” (inher-

ent in the individual) or “made” (a product of opportunity and reinforcement)? Compare what we know of the lives of Palmer Luckey and Sara Blakely with those of other creative individuals you know personally.

6-22. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

202 PART 2 The Individual

enDnOtes 1E. Bernstein, “‘Honey, You Never Said . . .,’” The Wall Street Journal, March 24, 2015, D1, D4. 2K. C. Yam, R. Fehr, and C. M. Barnes, “Morning Employees Are Perceived as Better Employees: Employees’ Start Times Influence Supervisor Performance Ratings,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 6 (2014): 1288–99. 3J. Dwyer, “Witness Accounts in Midtown Hammer Attack Show the Power of False Memory,” The New York Times, May 14, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/ nyregion/witness-accounts-in-midtown- hammer-attack-show-the-power-of-false- memory.html?_r=1. 4G. Fields and J. R. Emshwiller, “Long after Arrests, Records Live On,” The Wall Street Journal, December 26, 2014, A1, A10. 5S. S. Wang, “The Science of Standing Out,” The Wall Street Journal, March 18, 2014, D1, D4. 6E. Zell and Z. Krizan, “Do People Have Insight into Their Abilities? A Metasynthesis,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 2 (2014): 111–25. 7E. Demerouti, D. Xanthopoulou, I. Tsaousis, and A. B. Bakker, “Disentangling Task and Contextual Performance,” Journal of Personnel Psychology 13, no. 2 (2014): 59–69. 8G. P. Goodwin, J. Piazza, and P. Rozin, “Moral Character Predominates in Person Perception and Evaluation,” Journal of Person- ality and Social Psychology 106, no. 1 (2014): 148–68. 9P. Harvey, K. Madison, M. Martinko, T. R. Crook, and T. A. Crook, “Attribution Theory in the Organizational Sciences: The Road Traveled and the Path Ahead,” The Academy of Management Perspectives 28, no. 2 (2014): 128–46; and M. J. Martinko, P. Harvey, and M. T. Dasborough, “Attribution Theory in the Organizational Sciences: A Case of Unrealized Potential,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 32, no. 1 (2011): 144–49. 10C. M. de Melo, P. J. Carnevale, S. J. Read, and J. Gratch, “Reading People’s Minds from Emotion Expressions in Interdependent Deci- sion Making,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 106, no. 1 (2014): 73–88. 11J. M. Moran, E. Jolly, and J. P. Mitchell, “Spontaneous Mentalizing Predicts the Funda- mental Attribution Error,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 26, no. 3 (2014): 569–76; and D. R. Stadler, “Competing Roles for the Subfactors of Need for Closure in Committing the Fundamental Attribution Error,” Personality and Individual Differences 47, no. 7 (2009): 701–05. 12See, for instance, N. Epley and D. Dunning, “Feeling ‘Holier Than Thou’: Are Self-Serving Assessments Produced by Errors in Self or Social Prediction?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76, no. 6 (2000): 861–75;

M. Goerke, J. Moller, S. Schulz-Hardt, U. Na- piersky, and D. Frey, “‘It’s Not My Fault—But Only I Can Change It’: Counterfactual and Prefactual Thoughts of Managers,” Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 2 (2004): 279–92; and E. G. Hepper, R. H. Gramzow, and C. Sedikides, “Individual Differences in Self- Enhancement and Self-Protection Strategies: An Integrative Analysis,” Journal of Personality 78, no. 2 (2010): 781–814. 13See, for instance, A. H. Mezulis, L. Y. Abramson, J. S. Hyde, and B. L. Hankin, “Is There a Universal Positivity Bias in Attribu- tions: A Meta-Analytic Review of Individual, Developmental, and Cultural Differences in the Self-Serving Attributional Bias,” Psychologi- cal Bulletin 130, no. 5 (2004): 711–47; C. F. Falk, S. J. Heine, M. Yuki, and K. Takemura, “Why Do Westerners Self-Enhance More Than East Asians?” European Journal of Personality 23, no. 3 (2009): 183–203; and F. F. T. Chiang and T. A. Birtch, “Examining the Perceived Causes of Successful Employee Performance: An East–West Comparison,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 18, no. 2 (2007): 232–48. 14R. Friedman, W. Liu, C. C. Chen, and S.-C. S. Chi, “Causal Attribution for Interfirm Contract Violation: A Comparative Study of Chinese and American Commercial Arbitra- tors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 856–64. 15J. Spencer-Rodgers, M. J. Williams, D. L. Hamilton, K. Peng, and L. Wang, “Culture and Group Perception: Dispositional and Stereotypic Inferences about Novel and National Groups,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 93, no. 4 (2007): 525–43. 16J. D. Brown, “Across the (Not So) Great Divide: Cultural Similarities in Self-Evaluative Processes,” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 4, no. 5 (2010): 318–30. 17A. Zhang, C. Reyna, Z. Qian, and G. Yu, “Interpersonal Attributions of Responsibility in the Chinese Workplace: A Test of Western Models in a Collectivistic Context,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38, no. 9 (2008): 2361–77; and A. Zhang, F. Xia, and C. Li, “The Antecedents of Help Giving in Chinese Culture: Attribution, Judgment of Responsibil- ity, Expectation Change and the Reaction of Affect,” Social Behavior and Personality 35, no. 1 (2007): 135–42. 18See P. Rosenzweig, The Halo Effect (New York: The Free Press, 2007); I. Dennis, “Halo Effects in Grading Student Projects,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 4 (2007): 1169–76; C. E. Naquin and R. O. Tynan, “The Team Halo Effect: Why Teams Are Not Blamed for Their Failures,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 2 (2003): 332–40; and T. M. Bechger,

G. Maris, and Y. P. Hsiao, “Detecting Halo Effects in Performance-Based Evaluations,” Applied Psychological Measurement 34, no. 8 (2010): 607–19. 19J. K. Clark, K. C. Thiem, J. Barden, J. O’Rourke Stuart, and A. T. Evans, “Ste- reotype Validation: The Effects of Activat- ing Negative Stereotypes after Intellectual Performance,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 108, no. 4 (2015): 531–52. 20J. L. Eberhardt, P. G. Davies, V. J. Purdic- Vaughns, and S. L. Johnson, “Looking Deathworthy: Perceived Stereotypicality of Black Defendants Predicts Capital-Sentencing Outcomes,” Psychological Science 17, no. 5 (2006): 383–86. 21A. S. Rosette, G. J. Leonardelli, and K. W. Phillips, “The White Standard: Racial Bias in Leader Categorization,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 4 (2008): 758–77. 22H. G. Heneman III, T. A. Judge, and J. D. Kammeyer-Mueller, Staffing Organizations (Middleton, WI: Mendota House, 2012). 23J. Willis and A. Todorov, “First Impressions: Making Up Your Mind after a 100ms Expo- sure to a Face,” Psychological Science 17, no. 7 (2006): 592–98. 24N. Eisenkraft, “Accurate by Way of Aggrega- tion: Should You Trust Your Intuition-Based First Impressions?” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (March 2013): 277–79. 25See, for example, G. Natanovich and D. Eden, “Pygmalion Effects among Outreach Supervisors and Tutors: Extending Sex Gen- eralizability,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 6 (2008): 1382–89. 26D. B. McNatt and T. A. Judge, “Boundary Conditions of the Galatea Effect: A Field Experiment and Constructive Replication,” Academy of Management Journal (August 2004): 550–65; and X. M. Bezuijen, P. T. van den Berg, K. van Dam, and H. Thierry, “Pygmalion and Employee Learning: The Role of Leader Behaviors,” Journal of Management 35, (2009): 1248–67. 27See, for example, K. F. E. Wong and J. Y. Y. Kwong, “Effects of Rater Goals on Rating Patterns: Evidence from an Experimental Field Study,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 2 (2007): 577–85; and S. E. DeVoe and S. S. Iyengar, “Managers’ Theories of Subordinates: A Cross-Cultural Examination of Manager Perceptions of Motivation and Appraisal of Performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (January 2004): 47–61. 28D. A. Hofmann, “Overcoming the Obstacles to Cross-Functional Decision Making: Laying the Groundwork for Collaborative Problem Solving,” Organizational Dynamics 44, no. 1 (2015): 17–25. 29E. Bernstein, “The Right Answer is ‘No,’” The Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2014, D1–D2.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 203

30E. Shafir and R. A. LeBoeuf, “Rational- ity,” Annual Review of Psychology 53 (2002): 491–517. 31For a review of the rational decision-making model, see M. H. Bazerman and D. A. Moore, Judgment in Managerial Decision Making, 7th ed. (Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley, 2008). 32J. G. March, A Primer on Decision Mak- ing (New York: The Free Press, 2009); and D. Hardman and C. Harries, “How Rational Are We?” Psychologist (February 2002): 76–79. 33Bazerman and Moore, Judgment in Manage- rial Decision Making. 34J. E. Russo, K. A. Carlson, and M. G. Meloy, “Choosing an Inferior Alternative,” Psychologi- cal Science 17, no. 10 (2006): 899–904. 35N. Halevy and E. Y. Chou, “How Decisions Happen: Focal Points and Blind Spots in In- terdependent Decision Making,” Journal of Per- sonality and Social Psychology 106, no. 3 (2014): 398–417; D. Kahneman, “Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Econom- ics,” The American Economic Review 93, no. 5 (2003): 1449–75; and J. Zhang, C. K. Hsee, and Z. Xiao, “The Majority Rule in Individual Decision Making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 99 (2006): 102–11. 36G. Gigerenzer, “Why Heuristics Work,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 3, no. 1 (2008): 20–29; and A. K. Shah and D. M. Op- penheimer, “Heuristics Made Easy: An Effort- Reduction Framework,” Psychological Bulletin 134, no. 2 (2008): 207–22. 37See A. W. Kruglanski and G. Gigerenzer, “In- tuitive and Deliberate Judgments Are Based on Common Principles,” Psychological Review 118 (2011): 97–109. 38E. Dane and M. G. Pratt, “Exploring Intu- ition and Its Role in Managerial Decision Mak- ing,” Academy of Management Review 32, no. 1 (2007): 33–54; and J. A. Hicks, D. C. Cicero, J. Trent, C. M. Burton, and L. A. King, “Posi- tive Affect, Intuition, and Feelings of Mean- ing,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98 (2010): 967–79. 39C. Akinci and E. Sadler-Smith, “Intuition in Management Research: A Historical Review,” International Journal of Management Reviews 14 (2012): 104–22. 40S. P. Robbins, Decide & Conquer: Making Win- ning Decisions and Taking Control of Your Life (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Financial Times/ Prentice Hall, 2004), 13. 41S. Ludwig and J. Nafziger, “Beliefs about Overconfidence,” Theory and Decision (April 2011): 475–500. 42C. R. M. McKenzie, M. J. Liersch, and I. Yaniv, “Overconfidence in Interval Estimates: What Does Expertise Buy You,” Organizational Behav- ior and Human Decision Processes 107 (2008): 179–91. 43R. P. Larrick, K. A. Burson, and J. B. Soll, “Social Comparison and Confidence: When Thinking You’re Better Than Average Predicts

Overconfidence (and When It Does Not),” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 102 (2007): 76–94. 44K. M. Hmieleski and R. A. Baron, “En- trepreneurs’ Optimism and New Venture Performance: A Social Cognitive Perspec- tive,” Academy of Management Journal 52, no. 3 (2009): 473–88. 45R. Frick and A. K. Smith, “Overconfidence Game,” Kiplinger’s Personal Finance 64, no. 3 (2010): 23. 46See, for instance, J. P. Simmons, R. A. LeBoeuf, and L. D. Nelson, “The Effect of Accuracy Motivation on Anchoring and Adjustment: Do People Adjust from Their Provided Anchors?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99 (2010): 917–32. 47C. Janiszewski and D. Uy, “Precision of the Anchor Influences the Amount of Adjust- ment,” Psychological Science 19, no. 2 (2008): 121–27. 48See E. Jonas, S. Schultz-Hardt, D. Frey, and N. Thelen, “Confirmation Bias in Sequen- tial Information Search after Preliminary Decisions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (April 2001): 557–71; and W. Hart, D. Albarracín, A. H. Eagly, I. Brechan, M. Lindberg, and L. Merrill, “Feeling Vali- dated versus Being Correct: A Meta-Analysis of Selective Exposure to Information,” Psychologi- cal Bulletin 135 (2009): 555–88. 49T. Pachur, R. Hertwig, and F. Steinmann, “How Do People Judge Risks: Availability Heuristic, Affect Heuristic, or Both?” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 18 (2012): 314–30. 50G. Morgenson, “Debt Watchdogs: Tamed or Caught Napping?” The New York Times, Decem- ber 7, 2009, 1, 32. 51B. M. Staw, “The Escalation of Commitment to a Course of Action,” Academy of Management Review (October 1981): 577–87. 52D. J. Sleesman, D. E. Conlon, G. McNamara, and J. E. Miles, “Cleaning Up the Big Muddy: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Determinants of Escalation of Commitment,” Academy of Management Journal 55 (2012): 541–62. 53H. Drummond, “Escalation of Commit- ment: When to Stay the Course?” The Academy of Management Perspectives 28, no. 4 (2014): 430–46. 54See, for instance, A. James and A. Wells, “Death Beliefs, Superstitious Beliefs and Health Anxiety,” British Journal of Clinical Psychology (March 2002): 43–53; and U. Hahn and P. A. Warren, “Perceptions of Random- ness: Why Three Heads Are Better Than One,” Psychological Review 116 (2009): 454–61. 55See, for example, D. J. Keys and B. Schwartz, “Leaky Rationality: How Research on Behav- ioral Decision Making Challenges Normative Standards of Rationality,” Psychological Science 2, no. 2 (2007): 162–80; and U. Simonsohn, “Direct Risk Aversion: Evidence from Risky

Prospects Valued below Their Worst Out- come,” Psychological Science 20, no. 6 (2009): 686–92. 56J. K. Maner, M. T. Gailliot, D. A. Butz, and B. M. Peruche, “Power, Risk, and the Status Quo: Does Power Promote Riskier or More Conser- vative Decision Making?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33, no. 4 (2007): 451–62. 57A. Chakraborty, S. Sheikh, and N. Subrama- nian, “Termination Risk and Managerial Risk Taking,” Journal of Corporate Finance 13 (2007): 170–88. 58P. Bryant and R. Dunford, “The Influence of Regulatory Focus on Risky Decision-Making,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 57, no. 2 (2008): 335–59. 59A. J. Porcelli and M. R. Delgado, “Acute Stress Modulates Risk Taking in Financial Decision Making,” Psychological Science 20, no. 3 (2009): 278–83. 60R. L. Guilbault, F. B. Bryant, J. H. Brockway, and E. J. Posavac, “A Meta-Analysis of Research on Hindsight Bias,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology (September 2004): 103–17; and L. Werth, F. Strack, and J. Foerster, “Certainty and Uncertainty: The Two Faces of the Hindsight Bias,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (March 2002): 323–41. 61J. Bell, “The Final Cut?” Oregon Business 33, no. 5 (2010): 27. 62E. Dash and J. Creswell, “Citigroup Pays for a Rush to Risk,” The New York Times, Novem- ber 20, 2008, 1, 28; S. Pulliam, S. Ng, and R. Smith, “Merrill Upped Ante as Boom in Mortgage Bonds Fizzled,” The Wall Street Jour- nal, April 16, 2008, A1, A14; and M. Gladwell, “Connecting the Dots,” The New Yorker, March 10, 2003. 63H. Moon, J. R. Hollenbeck, S. E. Hum- phrey, and B. Maue, “The Tripartite Model of Neuroticism and the Suppression of Depres- sion and Anxiety within an Escalation of Commitment Dilemma,” Journal of Personality 71 (2003): 347–68; and H. Moon, “The Two Faces of Conscientiousness: Duty and Achieve- ment Striving in Escalation of Commitment Dilemmas,” Journal of Applied Psychology 86 (2001): 535–40. 64J. Musch, “Personality Differences in Hind- sight Bias,” Memory 11 (2003): 473–89. 65M. D. Coleman, “Emotion and the Self- Serving Bias,” Current Psychology (December 2011): 345–54. 66T. Huston, “Are Women Better Decision Makers?” The New York Times, October 19, 2014, 9. 67A. Borders and K. A. Hennebry, “Angry Rumination Moderates the Association between Perceived Ethnic Discrimination and Risky Behaviors,” Personality and Individual Differences 79 (2015): 81–86; and J. S. Hyde, A. H. Mezulis, and L. Y. Abramson, “The ABCs of Depression: Integrating Affective,

204 PART 2 The Individual

Biological, and Cognitive Models to Explain the Emergence of the Gender Difference in Depression,” Psychological Review 115, no. 2 (2008): 291–313. 68H. Connery and K. M. Davidson, “A Survey of Attitudes to Depression in the General Public: A Comparison of Age and Gender Differences,” Journal of Mental Health 15, no. 2 (April 2006): 179–89. 69M. Elias, “Thinking It Over, and Over, and Over,” USA Today, February 6, 2003, 10D. 70K. E. Stanovich and R. F. West, “On the Rela- tive Independence of Thinking Biases and Cognitive Ability,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94, no. 4 (2008): 672–95. 71N. J. Adler, International Dimensions of Orga- nizational Behavior, 4th ed. (Cincinnati, OH: South-Western Publishing, 2002), 182–89. 72B. Burrough, “How Big Business Can Take the High Road,” The New York Times, March 9, 2014, 10. 73A. Lukits, “Podcasts Send Shoppers to Omega-3s,” The Wall Street Journal, December 9, 2014, D2. 74E. DeAngelis, “Coaxing Better Behavior,” Monitor on Psychology (December 2014): 62–67. 75K. V. Kortenkamp and C. F. Moore, “Ethics under Uncertainty: The Morality and Appro- priateness of Utilitarianism When Outcomes Are Uncertain,” American Journal of Psychology 127, no. 3 (2014): 367–82. 76A. Lukits, “Hello and Bonjour to Moral Dilemmas,” The Wall Street Journal, May 13, 2014, D4. 77J. Hollings, “Let the Story Go: The Role of Emotion in the Decision-Making Process of the Reluctant, Vulnerable Witness or Whistle- Blower,” Journal of Business Ethics 114, no. 3 (2013): 501–12. 78D. E. Rupp, P. M. Wright, S. Aryee, and Y. Luo, “Organizational Justice, Behavioral Ethics, and Corporate Social Responsibility: Finally the Three Shall Merge,” Management and Organization Review 11 (2015): 15–24. 79L. L. Shu and F. Gino, “Sweeping Dishon- esty under the Rug: How Unethical Actions Lead to Forgetting of Moral Rules,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 1164–77. 80B. C. Gunia, L. Wang, L. Huang, J. Wang, and J. K. Murnighan, “Contemplation and Conversation: Subtle Influences on Moral De- cision Making,” Academy of Management Journal 55 (2012): 13–33. 81R. F. West, R. J. Meserve, and K. E. Stanov- ich, “Cognitive Sophistication Does Not Atten- uate the Bias Blind Spot,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 103 (2012): 506–19. 82J. B. Cullen, K. P. Parboteeah, and M. Hoegl, “Cross-National Differences in Managers’ Willingness to Justify Ethically Suspect Behav- iors: A Test of Institutional Anomie Theory,” Academy of Management Journal (June 2004): 411–21.

83N. Klein and H. Zhou, “Their Pants Aren’t on Fire,” The New York Times, March 25, 2014, D3. 84Ibid. 85Ibid. 86Ibid. 87E. Bernstein, “Lie Detection for Your Email,” The Wall Street Journal, May 20, 2014, D1. 88N. Klein and H. Zhou, “Their Pants Aren’t on Fire.” 89E. Bernstein, “Lie Detection for Your Email.” 90L. ten Brinke, D. Simson, and D. R. Carney, “Some Evidence for Unconscious Lie Detec- tion,” Psychological Science 25, no. 5 (2014): 1098–105. 91S. D. Levitt and S. J. Dubner, “Traponom- ics,” The Wall Street Journal, May 10–11 2014, C1, C2. 92N. Anderson, K. Potocnik, and J. Zhou, “In- novation and Creativity in Organizations: A State-of-the-Science Review, Prospective Com- mentary, and Guiding Framework,” Journal of Management 40, no. 5 (2014): 1297–333. 93“Is Your Art Killing You?” Investorideas. com, May 13, 2013, www.investorideas.com/ news/2013/renewable-energy/05134.asp. 94M. M. Gielnik, A.-C. Kramer, B. Kappel, and M. Frese, “Antecedents of Business Opportu- nity Identification and Innovation: Investigat- ing the Interplay of Information Processing and Information Acquisition,” Applied Psychol- ogy: An International Review 63, no. 2 (2014): 344–81. 95G. Anderson, “Three Tips to Foster Creativ- ity at Your Startup,” ArcticStartup, May 8, 2013, downloaded May 14, 2013, from http://www .arcticstartup.com/. 96G. Reynolds, “Want a Good Idea? Take a Walk,” The New York Times, May 6, 2014, D6. 97S. Shellenbarger, “The Power of the Doodle: Improve Your Focus and Memory,” The Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2014, D1, D3. 98E. Millar, “How Do Finnish Kids Excel without Rote Learning and Standard- ized Testing?” The Globe and Mail, May 9, 2013, downloaded May 12, 2015, from www .theglobeandmail.com/. 99Z. Harper, “Mark Cuban Wants You to Design the New Dallas Mavericks Uniforms,” CBSSports.com, May 13, 2013, http:// sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ball-dont-lie/ mark-cuban-wants-designs-dallas-mavericks- uniforms-214849952.html. 100C. K. W. De Dreu, B. A. Nijstad, M. Baas, I. Wolsink, and M. Roskes, “Working Memory Benefits Creative Insight, Musical Impro- visation, and Original Ideation through Maintained Task-Focused Attention,” Personal- ity and Social Psychology Bulletin 38 (2012): 656–69. 101C.-H. Wu, S. K. Parker, and J. P. J. de Jong, “Need for Cognition as an Antecedent of

Individual Innovation Behavior,” Journal of Management 40, no. 6 (2014): 1511–34. 102S. M. Wechsler, C. Vendramini, and T. Oak- land, “Thinking and Creative Styles: A Validity Study,” Creativity Research Journal 24 (April 2012): 235–42. 103Y. Gong, S. Cheung, M. Wang, and J. Huang, “Unfolding the Proactive Processes for Creativity: Integration of the Employee Proactivity, Information Exchange, and Psychological Safety Perspectives,” Journal of Management 38 (2012): 1611–33. 104A. Rego, F. Sousa, C. Marques, and M. P. E. Cunha, “Retail Employees’ Self-Efficacy and Hope Predicting Their Positive Affect and Creativity,” European Journal of Work and Orga- nizational Psychology 21, no. 6 (2012): 923–45. 105H. Zhang, H. K. Kwan, X. Zhang, and L.-Z. Wu, “High Core Self-Evaluators Maintain Creativity: A Motivational Model of Abusive Supervision,” Journal of Management 40, no. 4 (2012): 1151–74. 106D. K. Simonton, “The Mad-Genius Para- dox: Can Creative People Be More Mentally Healthy But Highly Creative People More Mentally Ill?” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 5 (2014): 470–80. 107C. Wang, S. Rodan, M. Fruin, and X. Xu, “Knowledge Networks, Collaboration Networks, and Exploratory Innovation,” Acad- emy of Management Journal 57, no. 2 (2014): 484–514. 108F. Gino and S. S. Wiltermuth, “Evil Genius? Dishonesty Can Lead to Greater Creativity,” Psychological Science 25, no. 4 (2014): 973–81. 109S. N. de Jesus, C. L. Rus, W. Lens, and S. Imaginário, “Intrinsic Motivation and Creativity Related to Product: A Meta-Analysis of the Studies Published between 1990–2010,” Creativity Research Journal 25 (2013): 80–84. 110A. Somech and A. Drach-Zahavy, “Translat- ing Team Creativity to Innovation Implemen- tation: The Role of Team Composition and Climate for Innovation,” Journal of Management 39 (2013): 684–708. 111L. Sun, Z. Zhang, J. Qi, and Z. X. Chen, “Empowerment and Creativity: A Cross-Level Investigation,” Leadership Quarterly 23 (2012): 55–65. 112M. Cerne, C. G. L. Nerstad, A. Dysvik, and M. Skerlavaj, “What Goes around Comes around: Knowledge Hiding, Perceived Moti- vational Climate, and Creativity,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 1 (2014): 172–92. 113S. Sonnenshein, “How Organizations Foster the Creative Use of Resources,” Acad- emy of Management Journal 57, no. 3 (2014): 814–48. 114V. Venkataramani, A. W. Richter, and R. Clarke, “Creative Benefits from Well- Connected Leaders: Leader Social Network Ties as Facilitators of Employee Radical Creativity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 5 (2014): 966–75.

Perception and Individual Decision Making CHAPTER 6 205

115J. E. Perry-Smith, “Social Network Ties beyond Nonredundancy: An Experimental Investigation of the Effect of Knowledge Content and Tie Strength on Creativity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 5 (2014): 831–46. 116T. Rinne, D. G. Steel, and J. Fairweather, “The Role of Hofstede’s Individualism in National-Level Creativity,” Creativity Research Journal 25 (2013): 129–36. 117X. Yi, W. Hu, H. Scheithauer, and W. Niu, “Cultural and Bilingual Influences on Artistic Creativity Performances: Comparison of Ger- man and Chinese Students,” Creativity Research Journal 25 (2013): 97–108. 118D. Liu, H. Liao, and R. Loi, “The Dark Side of Leadership: A Three-Level Investigation of the Cascading Effect of Abusive Supervision on Employee Creativity,” Academy of Manage- ment Journal 55 (2012): 1187–212. 119J. B. Avey, F. L. Richmond, and D. R. Nixon, “Leader Positivity and Follower Creativity: An Experimental Analysis,” Journal of Creative Behavior 46 (2012): 99–118; and

A. Rego, Arménio, F. Sousa, C. Marques, and M. E. Cunha, “Authentic Leadership Promoting Employees’ Psychological Capital and Creativity,” Journal of Business Research 65 (2012): 429–37. 120I. J. Hoever, D. van Knippenberg, W. P. van Ginkel, and H. G. Barkema, “Fostering Team Creativity: Perspective Taking as Key to Un- locking Diversity’s Potential,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012): 982–96. 121S. J. Shin, T. Kim, J. Lee, and L. Bian, “Cog- nitive Team Diversity and Individual Team Member Creativity: A Cross-Level Interaction,” Academy of Management Journal 55 (2012): 197–212. 122A. W. Richter, G. Hirst, D. van Knippen- berg, and M. Baer, “Creative Self-Efficacy and Individual Creativity in Team Contexts: Cross- Level Interactions with Team Informational Resources,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97 (2012): 1282–90. 123X. Huang, JJ P.-A. Hsieh, and W. He, “Expertise Dissimilarity and Creativity: The Contingent Roles of Tacit and Explicit

Knowledge Sharing,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 99, no. 5 (2014): 816–30. 124T. B. Harris, N. Li, W. R. Boswell, X.-A. Zhang, and Z. Xie, “Getting What’s New from Newcomers: Empowering Leadership, Creativity, and Adjustment in the Socializa- tion Context,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 567–604. 125A. H. Y. Hon, M. Bloom, and J. M. Crant, “Overcoming Resistance to Change and Enhancing Creative Performance,” Journal of Management 40, no. 3 (2014): 919–41. 126J. S. Mueller, S. Melwani, and J. A. Goncalo, “The Bias against Creativity: Why People Desire but Reject Creative Ideas,” Psychological Science 23 (2012): 13–17. 127T. Montag, C. P. Maertz, and M. Baer, “A Critical Analysis of the Workplace Creativity Criterion Space,” Journal of Management 38 (2012): 1362–86. 128M. Baer, “Putting Creativity to Work: The Implementation of Creative Ideas in Organiza- tions,” Academy of Management Journal 55 (2012): 1102–19.

S ou

rc e:

J ef

f S

ch ea

r/ G

et ty

Im ag

es

Motivation Concepts7

206

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 207

Motivated toward Corporate SoCial reSponSibility

As organizations face increasing public pressure for sustainability, corpo-rate social responsibility (CSR) has become a major part of most CEOs’ agendas. The motivation for these CEOs is clear: the media, customers, em-

ployees, and governments herald sustainability initiatives like

GE’s Ecomagination, which pioneers technology efficiency, and

philanthropy programs like Richard Branson’s Re*Generation,

which supports homeless youth. But how does an organization motivate employees for huge and ongoing volunteer efforts

like Lowe’s Heroes, shown in the picture, which helps rebuild

homes after disasters and revitalize communities?

According to research in the United Kingdom, a good por-

tion of employees may already be motivated toward CSR work. Some employees are motivated by a sense of reciproc-

ity, giving back to the communities in which they live or aid-

ing organizations from which they’ve previously benefited. An

example is Lowe’s Hero James Jackson, who helped revital-

ize an Indianapolis park. “I’m so thrilled to have been a part

of this transformational journey for the JV Hill Park,” he said.

“The community has new life again, which impacts so many youth for years

to come.” Other employees are motivated by the opportunity to socialize

with people within the organization and community, while still others want to develop business networks for future use. Many seem to like exercis-

ing the networks they already have, drawing upon their contacts for CSR

7-1 Describe the three key elements of motivation.

7-2 Compare the early theories of motivation.

7-3 Contrast the elements of self-determination theory and goal-setting theory.

7-4 Demonstrate the differences among self-efficacy theory, reinforcement theory, equity theory, and expectancy theory.

7-5 Identify the implications of employee job engage- ment for managers.

7-6 Describe how the contemporary theories of motiva- tion complement one another.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

208 PART 2 The Individual

projects. And most like to use volunteering opportunities to learn more.

For example, one study participant who has been mentoring students in

business said, “It’s nice to meet other people in Derby and around, see how

they do things, get tips and lots of business information.”

How do organizations influence their employees to volunteer? Research

suggests that half the organizations in Canada actively encourage em-

ployee volunteering. As a result, fully one-quarter of all the volunteer work in the country is done by employee volunteers. The study found that the

availability of organizational support—use of work time, paid time to vol-

unteer, facility space, organizational resources—was critical to employee

CSR motivation. Such support was correlated with an increase in annual

volunteer hours, particularly among women. Furthermore, support yielded

higher participation for almost all types of organizational volunteer CSR

activities.

However, the study found employees age 35 and older, with less educa-

tion than a high school diploma, or who were married, received less support. The reasons for these differences are not known. Women also received less

support than men when it came to flexible hours and time off needed for

volunteering. It also seems that women might make fewer requests for sup-

port. Although these findings are from just one study, the message is clear:

Organizations may increase their overall CSR contributions by clearly offer-

ing tangible support for everyone, along with opportunities to serve.

One final employee motivator is the intrinsic reward from working with your organization’s team to accomplish a worthy project. After a tough day

cleaning up in the aftermath of the 2014 tornado in Tupelo, Mississippi,

Tad Agoglia of the First Response Team of America told the Lowe’s Heroes

team, “You guys, your attitudes, [you do] just anything and everything to get

it done, just do it, you really took your time to help this family, and it meant

a lot. So this was a great day, and you guys made it a great day. Thank you.”

Sources: Lowe’s in the Community, May 5, 2015, http://Lowesinthecommunity.Tumblr.Com/ Post/118215046887/The-Week-Leading-Up-To-The-Final-Four; F. Macphail and P. Bowles, “Corporate Social Responsibility as Support for Employee Volunteers: Impacts, Gender Puzzles and Policy Implications in Canada,” Journal of Business Ethics 84 (2009): 405–16; and J. N. Muthuri, D. Matten, and J. Moon, “Employee Volunteering and Social Capital: Contri- butions to Corporate Social Responsibility,” British Journal of Management 20 (2009): 75–89.

As we read in the opening story, employees don’t always volunteer just because it’s a good thing to do; they have to be motivated. A significant part of their motivation comes from an internal desire to contribute, but orga- nizations can also play an important role by encouraging and enabling them. Motivating employees—to volunteer and to work—is one of the most important and challenging aspects of management. As we will see, there is no shortage of advice about how to do it.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 209

Motivation is one of the most frequently researched topics in organizational behavior (OB).1 In one survey, 69 percent of workers reported wasting time at work every day, and nearly a quarter said they waste between 30 and 60 minutes each day. How? Usually by surfing the Internet (checking the news and visiting social network sites) and chatting with coworkers.2 So, though times change, the problem of motivating a workforce stays the same.

In this chapter, we’ll review the basics of motivation, assess motivation theo- ries, and provide an integrative model that fits theories together. But first, take a look at the potential that a little motivation to ask for a raise can yield, shown in the OB Poll.

Motivation and Early Theories Some individuals seem driven to succeed. The same young student who strug- gles to read a textbook for more than 20 minutes may devour a Harry Potter book in a day. The difference is the situation. As we analyze the concept of moti- vation, keep in mind that the level of motivation varies both between individuals and within individuals at different times.

We define motivation as the processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.3 While gen- eral motivation is concerned with effort toward any goal, we’ll narrow the focus to organizational goals.

Intensity describes how hard a person tries. This is the element most of us focus on when we talk about motivation. However, high intensity is unlikely to lead to favorable job-performance outcomes unless the effort is channeled in a direction that benefits the organization. Therefore, we consider the quality of effort as well as its intensity. Effort directed toward, and consistent with, the organization’s goals is the kind of effort we should be seeking. Finally, motivation has a persistence dimension. This measures how long a person can maintain effort. Motivated individuals stay with a task long enough to achieve their goals.

7-1 Describe the three key elements of motivation.

motivation The processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.

Ob POLL asking for a raise: business executives

Note: Survey of 3,900 executives from 31 countries.

Source: Based on Accenture, “The Path Forward” (2012), http://www.accenture.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/Accenture-IWD-Research-Deck-2012-

FINAL.pdf#zoom=50, 36.

When you asked for a pay raise, did you receive one?

Yes 79%

No 21%

210 PART 2 The Individual

Early Theories of Motivation Three theories of employee motivation formulated during the 1950s are prob- ably the best known. Although they are now of questionable validity (as we’ll discuss), they represent a foundation, and practicing managers still use their terminology.

Hierarchy of needs theory The best-known theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,4 which hypothesizes that within every human being there is a hierarchy of five needs. Recently, a sixth need has been proposed for a highest level—intrinsic values—which is said to have originated from Maslow, but it has yet to gain wide- spread acceptance.5 The original five needs are:

1. Physiological. Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and other bodily needs. 2. Safety-security. Security and protection from physical and emotional harm. 3. Social-belongingness. Affection, belongingness, acceptance, and friendship. 4. Esteem. Internal factors such as self-respect, autonomy, and achievement,

and external factors such as status, recognition, and attention. 5. Self-actualization. Drive to become what we are capable of becoming;

includes growth, achieving our potential, and self-fulfillment.

According to Maslow, as each need becomes substantially satisfied, the next one becomes dominant. So if you want to motivate someone, you need to understand what level of the hierarchy that person is currently on and focus on satisfying needs at or above that level. We depict the hierarchy as a pyramid in Exhibit 7-1 since this is its best-known presentation, but Maslow referred to the needs only in terms of levels.

Maslow’s theory has received long-standing wide recognition, particularly among practicing managers. It is intuitively logical and easy to understand, and some research has validated it.6 Unfortunately, however, most research does not, especially when the theory is applied to diverse cultures,7 with the pos- sible exception of physiological needs.8 But old theories, especially intuitively

7-2 Compare the early theories of motivation.

hierarchy of needs Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of five needs—physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self-actualization—in which, as each need is substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant.

Watch It! If your professor assigned this, sign in to mymanagementlab.com to watch a video titled Motivation (TMZ Role Play) to learn more about this topic and respond to questions.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of needsExhibit 7-1

Self- actualization

Esteem

Social-belongingness

Safety-security

Physiological

Source: H. Skelsey, “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs—the Sixth Level,” Psychologist (2014): 982–83.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 211

logical ones, die hard. It is thus important to be aware of the prevailing public acceptance of the hierarchy when discussing motivation.

two-Factor theory Believing an individual’s relationship to work is basic, and that the attitude toward work can determine success or failure, psychologist Frederick Herzberg wondered, “What do people want from their jobs?” He asked people to describe, in detail, situations in which they felt exceptionally good or bad about their jobs. The responses differed significantly and led Hertzberg to his two-factor theory (also called motivation-hygiene theory, but this term is not used much today).9

As shown in Exhibit 7-2, intrinsic factors such as advancement, recognition, responsibility, and achievement seem related to job satisfaction. Respondents who felt good about their work tended to attribute these factors to their situ- ations, while dissatisfied respondents tended to cite extrinsic factors, such as supervision, pay, company policies, and work conditions.

To Herzberg, the data suggest that the opposite of satisfaction is not dis- satisfaction, as was traditionally believed. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. Herzberg proposed a dual continuum: The opposite of “satisfaction” is “no satisfaction,” and the opposite of “dissatisfaction” is “no dissatisfaction” (see Exhibit 7-3).

Under two-factor theory, the factors that lead to job satisfaction are separate and distinct from those that lead to job dissatisfaction. Therefore, managers who seek to eliminate factors that can create job dissatisfaction may bring about peace, but not necessarily motivation. They will be placating rather than moti- vating their workers. Conditions such as quality of supervision, pay, company policies, physical work conditions, relationships with others, and job security are hygiene factors. When they’re adequate, people will not be dissatisfied; neither

two-factor theory A theory that relates intrinsic factors to job satisfaction and associates extrinsic factors with dissatisfaction. Also called motivation-hygiene theory.

hygiene factors Factors—such as company policy and administration, supervision, and salary—that, when adequate in a job, placate workers. When these factors are adequate, people will not be dissatisfied.

Source: Based on Harvard Business Review. “Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers.” An exhibit from One More Time: How Do You

Motivate Employees? by Frederick Herzberg, January 2003. Copyright © 2003 by the Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All

rights reserved.

Comparison of Satisfiers and dissatisfiersExhibit 7-2

0% 5%

10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

A ch

ie ve

m en

t

Re co

gn iti

on

W or

k Its

el f

Re sp

on sib

ili ty

A dv

an ce

m en

t

G ro

w th

Factors characterizing 1,753 events on the job that lead to

extreme satisfaction

0% 5%

10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Po lic

y an

d ad

m in

ist ra

tio n

Su pe

rv isi

on

Re la

tio ns

hi p

w ith

su pe

rv iso

r

W or

k co

nd iti

on s

Sa la

ry

Re la

tio ns

hi p

w ith

p ee

rs

Factors characterizing 1,844 events on the job that lead to

extreme dissatisfaction

212 PART 2 The Individual

will they be satisfied. If we want to motivate people on their jobs, we should emphasize factors associated with the work itself or with outcomes directly derived from it, such as promotional opportunities, personal growth opportuni- ties, recognition, responsibility, and achievement. These are the characteristics people find intrinsically rewarding.

The two-factor theory has not been well supported in research. Criticisms center on Herzberg’s original methodology and his assumptions, such as the statement that satisfaction is strongly related to productivity. Subsequent research has also shown that if hygiene and motivational factors are equally important to a person, both are capable of motivating.

Regardless of the criticisms, Herzberg’s theory has been quite influential and currently is very much in use in research in Asia.10 Few managers worldwide are unfamiliar with its recommendations.

McClelland’s theory of needs You have one beanbag and five targets set up in front of you, each farther away than the last. Target A sits almost within arm’s reach. If you hit it, you get $2. Target B is a bit farther out and pays $4, but only about 80 percent of the people who try can hit it. Target C pays $8, and about half the people who try can hit it. Very few people can hit Target D, but the payoff is $16 for those who do. Finally, Target E pays $32, but it’s almost impossible to achieve. Which would you try for? If you selected C, you’re likely to be a high achiever. Why? Read on.

McClelland’s theory of needs was developed by David McClelland and his associates.11 As opposed to, say, Maslow’s hierarchy, these needs are more like motivating factors than strict needs for survival. There are three:

• Need for achievement (nAch) is the drive to excel, to achieve in relationship to a set of standards.

• Need for power (nPow) is the need to make others behave in a way they would not have otherwise.

• Need for affiliation (nAff) is the desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships.

McClelland and subsequent researchers focused most of their attention on nAch. High achievers perform best when they perceive their probability of success as 0.5—that is, a 50–50 chance. They dislike gambling with high odds because they get no achievement satisfaction from success that comes by pure chance. Similarly, they dislike low odds (high probability of success) because

Mcclelland’s theory of needs A theory that states achievement, power, and affiliation are three important needs that help explain motivation.

need for achievement (nach) The drive to excel, to achieve in relationship to a set of standards, and to strive to succeed.

need for power (nPow) The need to make others behave in a way in which they would not have behaved otherwise.

need for affiliation (naff) The desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships.

Contrasting view of Satisfaction and dissatisfactionExhibit 7-3

Satisfaction

Traditional view

Herzberg’s view

Dissatisfaction

Satisfaction No satisfaction

No dissatisfaction Dissatisfaction

Satisfaction Dissatisfaction

No dissatisfaction Dissatisfaction

Satisfaction No satisfaction

Motivators

Hygiene factors

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 213

then there is no challenge to their skills. They like to set goals that require stretching themselves a little.

Relying on an extensive amount of research, we can predict some relation- ships between achievement need and job performance. First, when jobs have a high degree of personal responsibility, feedback, and an intermediate degree of risk, high achievers are strongly motivated. Second, a high need to achieve does not necessarily make someone a good manager, especially in large organi- zations. People with a high achievement need are interested in how well they do personally, and not in influencing others to do well. Third, needs for affiliation and power tend to be closely related to managerial success. The best managers may be high in their need for power and low in their need for affiliation.12

The view that a high achievement need acts as an internal motivator presup- poses two cultural characteristics—willingness to accept a moderate degree of risk (which excludes countries with strong uncertainty-avoidance characteris- tics), and concern with performance (which applies to countries with strong achievement characteristics). This combination is found in Anglo-American countries such as the United States, Canada, and Great Britain, and much less in Chile and Portugal.

McClelland’s theory has research support, particularly cross-culturally (when cultural dimensions including power distance are taken into account).13 The concept of the need for achievement has received a great deal of research attention and acceptance in a wide array of fields, including organizational behavior, psychology, and general business.14 Therefore, in this text we utilize the concept descriptively. The need for power also has research support, but it may be more familiar to people in broad terms than in relation to the origi- nal definition.15 We will discuss power much more in Chapter 13. The need for affiliation is well established and accepted in research. Although it may seem like an updated version of Maslow’s social need, it is actually quite sepa- rate. Many people take for granted the idea that human beings have a drive toward relationships, so none of us may completely lack this motivation. How- ever, recent research of Cameroonian and German adults suggests we may be

Entrepreneur Fred DeLuca is a high achiever motivated by work that demands a high degree of personal responsibility. He co-founded a Subway sandwich shop in 1965 at the age of 17 to help finance his college educa- tion and grew the company into the world’s largest fast-food franchise with almost 44,000 shops in more than 100 countries. Source: Geoff Caddick/AP Images

214 PART 2 The Individual

The new guy in the office is nice enough, but he’s straight out of col- lege, and I have 20 years of experi- ence in the field. I’d like to help him out, but he won’t take it no matter how I approach him. Is there anything I can do to motivate him to accept my advice? He badly needs a few pointers.

— James Dear James: It’s great that you want to help, and surely you have wisdom to offer. But let’s start with this: When is the last time you took someone else’s advice? Chances are it’s easier for you to remember the last time you didn’t take someone’s advice than when you did. That’s because we want success on our own terms, and we don’t like the idea that a ready answer was out there all along (and we missed it). “When some- body says, ‘You should do something,’ the subtext is: ‘You’re an idiot for not al- ready doing it,’” said psychologist Alan Goldberg. “Nobody takes advice under those conditions.” So under what condi- tions do people take advice?

There are two parts to the motiva- tion equation for advice: what your co- worker wants to hear, and how you can

approach him. For the first part, keep this rule in mind: He wants to hear that whatever decisions he’s made are brilliant. If he hears anything different from that, he’s likely to tune you out or keep talking until you come over to his side.

For the second part, your coworker’s motivation to accept and, more impor- tantly, act on advice has a lot to do with how you approach him. Are you likely to “impart your wisdom to the young- er generation?” Anything like “I wish I had known this when I was just start- ing out like you” advice will likely have him thinking you (and your advice) are out of date. Are you going to give “if I were you, I would do this” advice? He may resent your intrusion. Accord- ing to research, what is most likely to work is a gentle suggestion, phrased as a request. Ravi Dhar, a director at Yale, said, “Interrogatives have less reactance and may be more effective.” You might say, for instance, “Would you consider trying out this idea?”

Take heart, the problem isn’t that we don’t like advice—we do, as long as we seek it. According to research, we are more motivated toward advice when

we are facing important decisions, so good timing may work in your favor. When he does ask, you may suggest that he writes down the parameters of his choices and his interpretations of the ethics of each decision. Research- er Dan Ariely has found that we are much more motivated to make morally right decisions when we’ve considered the moral implications in a forthright manner. In this way, your coworker may motivate himself to make the right decisions.

Keep trying!

Sources: D. Ariely, “What Price for the Soul of a Stranger?” The Wall Street Journal, May 10–11, 2014, C12; J. Queenan, “A Word to the Wise,” The Wall Street Journal, February 8–9, 2014, C1–C2; and S. Reddy, “The Trick to Getting People to Take the Stairs? Just Ask,” The Wall Street Journal, February 17, 2015, R4.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results ob- tained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any deci- sion made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

Why won’t he take my advice? Career objectives

constrained by our personalities to the extent that we are high in neuroticism. Agreeableness supports our pursuit of affiliation, while extraversion has no significant effect.16

The degree to which we have each of the three needs is difficult to measure, and therefore the theory is difficult to put into practice. It is more common to find situations in which managers aware of these motivational drivers label employees based on observations made over time. Therefore, the concepts are helpful, but not often used objectively.

Contemporary Theories of Motivation Contemporary theories of motivation have one thing in common: Each has a rea- sonable degree of valid supporting documentation. We call them “contemporary theories” because they represent the latest thinking in explaining employee motivation. This doesn’t mean they are unquestionably right.

7-3 Contrast the elements of self-determination theory and goal-setting theory.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 215

Self-determination theory “It’s strange,” said Marcia. “I started work at the Humane Society as a volunteer. I put in 15 hours a week helping people adopt pets. And I loved coming to work. Then, 3 months ago, they hired me full-time at $11 an hour. I’m doing the same work I did before. But I’m not finding it as much fun.”

Does Marcia’s reaction seem counterintuitive? There’s an explanation for it. It’s called self-determination theory, which proposes that people prefer to feel they have control over their actions, so anything that makes a previously enjoyed task feel more like an obligation than a freely chosen activity will undermine motivation.17 The theory is widely used in psychology, management, education, and medical research.

Much research on self-determination theory in OB has focused on cognitive evaluation theory, a complementary theory hypothesizing that extrinsic rewards will reduce intrinsic interest in a task. When people are paid for work, it feels less like something they want to do and more like something they have to do. Self-determination theory proposes that in addition to being driven by a need for autonomy, people seek ways to achieve competence and make positive con- nections with others. Its major implications relate to work rewards.

What does self-determination theory suggest about providing rewards? It suggests that some caution in the use of extrinsic rewards to motivate is wise, and that pursuing goals from intrinsic motives (such as a strong interest in the work itself) is more sustaining to human motivation than are extrinsic rewards. Similarly, cognitive evaluation theory suggests that providing extrinsic incen- tives may, in many cases, undermine intrinsic motivation. For example, if a com- puter programmer values writing code because she likes to solve problems, a bonus for writing a certain number of lines of code every day could feel coer- cive, and her intrinsic motivation would suffer. She may or may not increase her number of lines of code per day in response to the extrinsic motivator. In sup- port, a recent meta-analysis confirms that intrinsic motivation contributes to the quality of work, while incentives contribute to the quantity of work. Although intrinsic motivation predicts performance whether or not there are incentives, it may be less of a predictor when incentives are tied to performance directly (such as with monetary bonuses) rather than indirectly.18

A more recent outgrowth of self-determination theory is self-concordance, which considers how strongly people’s reasons for pursuing goals are consistent with their interests and core values. OB research suggests that people who pur- sue work goals for intrinsic reasons are more satisfied with their jobs, feel they fit into their organizations better, and may perform better.19 Across cultures, if individuals pursue goals because of intrinsic interest, they are more likely to attain goals, are happier when they do, and are happy even if they do not.20 Why? Because the process of striving toward goals is fun whether or not the goal is achieved. Recent research reveals that when people do not enjoy their work for intrinsic reasons, those who work because they feel obligated to do so can still perform acceptably, though they experience higher levels of strain as a result.21 In contrast, people who pursue goals for extrinsic reasons (money, status, or other benefits) are less likely to attain goals and less happy even when they do. Why? Because the goals are less meaningful to them.22

What does all this mean? For individuals, it means you should choose your job for reasons other than extrinsic rewards. For organizations, it means man- agers should provide intrinsic as well as extrinsic incentives. Managers need to make the work interesting, provide recognition, and support employee growth and development. Employees who feel that what they do is within their control and a result of free choice are likely to be more motivated by their work and committed to their employers.23

cognitive evaluation theory A version of self-determination theory that holds that allocating extrinsic rewards for behavior that had been previously intrinsically rewarding tends to decrease the overall level of motivation if the rewards are seen as controlling.

self-determination theory A theory of motivation that is concerned with the beneficial effects of intrinsic motivation and the harmful effects of extrinsic motivation.

self-concordance The degree to which people’s reasons for pursuing goals are consistent with their interests and core values.

216 PART 2 The Individual

Goal-Setting theory You’ve likely heard the sentiment a number of times: “Just do your best. That’s all anyone can ask.” But what does “do your best” mean? Do we ever know whether we’ve achieved that vague goal? Research on goal-setting theory, proposed by Edwin Locke, reveals the impressive effects of goal specificity, challenge, and feedback on performance. Under the theory, intentions to work toward a goal are considered a major source of work motivation.24

Goal-setting theory is well supported. Evidence strongly suggests that specific goals increase performance; that difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than do easy goals; and that feedback leads to higher performance than does nonfeedback.25 Why? First, specificity itself seems to act as an inter- nal stimulus. When a trucker commits to making 12 round-trip hauls between Toronto and New York each week, this intention gives him a specific objective to attain. All things being equal, he will outperform a counterpart with no goals or the generalized goal “do your best.”

Second, if factors such as acceptance of goals are held constant, the more difficult the goal, the higher the level of performance. Of course, it’s logical to assume easier goals are more likely to be accepted. But once a hard task has been accepted, we can expect the employee to exert a high level of effort to try to achieve it.

Third, people do better when they get feedback on how well they are pro- gressing toward their goals because it helps identify discrepancies between what they have done and what they want to do next—that is, feedback guides behav- ior. But all feedback is not equally potent. Self-generated feedback—with which

goal-setting theory A theory that says that specific and difficult goals, with feedback, lead to higher performance.

W e might think we should mo-tivate employees to display organizational citizenship be- havior (OCB), and that helping others would benefit their careers. We would probably also believe our own OCB will yield us career benefits. Surprisingly, there is some evidence that these as- sumptions are false, at least in certain organizations. Why?

In some organizations, employees are evaluated more on how their work gets done than on how much. If they possess the requisite knowledge and skills, or if they demonstrate the right be- haviors on the job (for example, always greeting customers with a smile), they are determined by management to be motivated, “good” performers. In these

situations, OCBs are considered as the next higher level of good employee be- havior. Employees’ careers thus benefit as a result of their helpfulness toward coworkers.

However, in other organizations, employees are evaluated more on what gets done. Here, employees are determined to be “good” performers if they meet objective goals such as bill- ing clients a certain number of hours or reaching a certain sales volume. When managers overlook employee OCB, frown on helpful behaviors, or create an overly competitive organi- zational culture, employees become unmotivated to continue their help- ful actions. Those who still engage in OCB can find their career progress is

slowed when they take time away from core tasks to be helpful.

The upshot? There may be a trade-off between being a good performer and be- ing a good citizen. In organizations that focus more on behaviors, following your motivation to be a good citizen can help to accomplish your career goals. How- ever, in organizations that focus more on objective outcomes, you may need to consider the cost of your good deeds.

Sources: D. M. Bergeron, “The Potential Par- adox of Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Good Citizens at What Cost?” Academy of Management Review 32, no. 4 (2007); and D. M. Bergeron, A. J. Shipp, B. Rosen, and S. A. Furst, “Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Career Outcomes: The Cost of Being a Good Citizen,” Journal of Manage- ment 39, no. 4 (2013): 958–84.

Helping Others and being a good citizen is good for Your career

Myth or Science?

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 217

employees are able to monitor their own progress or receive feedback from the task process itself—is more powerful than externally generated feedback.26

If employees can participate in the setting of their own goals, will they try harder? The evidence is mixed. In some studies, participatively set goals yielded superior performance; in others, individuals performed best when assigned goals by their boss. One study in China found, for instance, that participative team goal setting improved team outcomes.27 Another study found that participation results in more achievable goals for individuals.28 Without participation, the individual pursuing the goal needs to clearly understand its purpose and importance.29

Three personal factors influence the goals–performance relationship: goal commitment, task characteristics, and national culture.

Goal Commitment Goal-setting theory assumes an individual is committed to the goal and determined not to lower or abandon it. The individual (1) believes he or she can achieve the goal and (2) wants to achieve it.30 Goal commitment is most likely to occur when goals are made public, when the individual has an internal locus of control, when the goals are self-set rather than assigned, and when they are based at least partially on individual ability.31

task Characteristics Goals themselves seem to affect performance more strong- ly when tasks are simple rather than complex, well learned rather than novel, independent rather than interdependent, and on the high end of achievable.32 On interdependent tasks, group goals are preferable. Paradoxically, goal aban- donment following an initial failure is more likely for individuals who self-affirm their core values, possibly because they more strongly internalize the implica- tions of failure than others.33

national Culture Setting specific, difficult, individual goals may have different effects in different cultures. In collectivistic and high-power-distance cultures, achievable moderate goals can be more motivating than difficult ones.34 Finally, assigned goals appear to generate greater goal commitment in high than in low

Co-founders Anthony Thomson, left, and Vernon Hill launched the Metro Bank in London in 2010 with the goal of adding 200 new branches and cap- turing 10 percent of London’s banking market. This challenging goal moti- vates employees to exert a high level of effort in giving customers exception- ally convenient, flexible, and friendly— including pet-friendly—service. Source: Toby Melville/Reuters

218 PART 2 The Individual

power-distance cultures.35 However, research has not shown that group-based goals are more effective in collectivist than in individualist cultures. More research is needed to assess how goal constructs might differ across cultures.

Although goal-setting has positive outcomes, it’s not unequivocally ben- eficial. For example, some goals may be too effective.36 When learning some- thing is important, goals related to performance undermine adaptation and creativity because people become too focused on outcomes and ignore the learning process. Nor are all goals equally effective. For rote tasks with quan- tifiable standards of productivity, goals that reward quantity can be highly motivating. For other jobs that require complex thinking and personal investment, goals and rewards for quantity may not be effective.37 Finally, individuals may fail to give up on an unattainable goal even when it might be beneficial to do so.

Research has found that people differ in the way they regulate their thoughts and behaviors during goal pursuit. Generally, people fall into one of two catego- ries, though they could belong to both. Those with a promotion focus strive for advancement and accomplishment and approach conditions that move them closer toward desired goals. This concept is similar to the approach side of the approach-avoidance framework discussed in Chapter 5. Those with a prevention  focus strive to fulfill duties and obligations and avoid conditions that pull them away from desired goals. Aspects of this concept are similar to the avoidance side of the approach-avoidance framework. Although you would be right in noting that both strategies are in the service of goal accomplishment, the manner in which they get there is quite different. As an example, consider studying for an exam. You could engage in promotion-focused activities such as reading class materials, or you could engage in prevention-focused activities such as refraining from doing things that would get in the way of studying, such as playing video games.

You may ask, “Which is the better strategy?” Well, the answer depends on the outcome you are striving for. While a promotion (but not a prevention) focus is related to higher levels of task performance, citizenship behavior, and innova- tion, a prevention (but not a promotion) focus is related to safety performance. Ideally, it’s probably best to be both promotion and prevention oriented.38 Keep in mind a person’s job satisfaction will be more heavily impacted by low success when that person has an avoidance (prevention) outlook,39 so set achievable goals, remove distractions, and provide structure for these individuals.40

implementing Goal-Setting How do managers make goal-setting theory operational? That’s often left up to the individual. Some managers set aggres- sive performance targets—what General Electric called “stretch goals.” Some leaders, such as Procter & Gamble’s former CEO Robert McDonald and Best Buy’s CEO Hubert Joly, are known for their demanding performance goals. But many managers don’t set goals. When asked whether their jobs had clearly defined goals, a minority of survey respondents said yes.41

A more systematic way to utilize goal-setting is with management by objec- tives (MBO), an initiative most popular in the 1970s but still used today. MBO emphasizes participatively set goals that are tangible, verifiable, and measur- able. As in Exhibit 7-4, the organization’s overall objectives are translated into specific cascading objectives for each level (divisional, departmental, indi- vidual). But because lower-unit managers jointly participate in setting their own goals, MBO works from the bottom up as well as from the top down. The result is a hierarchy that links objectives at one level to those at the next. For the individual employee, MBO provides specific personal performance objectives.

prevention focus A self-regulation strategy that involves striving for goals by fulfilling duties and obligations.

management by objectives (MBO) A program that encompasses specific goals, participatively set, for an explicit time period, with feedback on goal progress.

promotion focus A self-regulation strategy that involves striving for goals through advancement and accomplishment.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 219

Four ingredients are common to MBO programs: goal specificity, participa- tion in decision making (including the setting of goals or objectives), an explicit time period, and performance feedback.42 Many elements in MBO programs match the propositions of goal-setting theory.

You’ll find MBO programs in many business, health care, educational, government, and nonprofit organizations.43 A version of MBO, called Man- agement by Objectives and Results (MBOR), has been used for 30 years in the governments of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.44 However, the popularity of these programs does not mean they always work.45 When MBO fails, the culprits tend to be unrealistic expectations, lack of commitment by top management, and inability or unwillingness to allocate rewards based on goal accomplishment.

Goal-Setting and ethics The relationship between goal-setting and ethics is quite complex: If we emphasize the attainment of goals, what is the cost? The answer is probably found in the standards we set for goal achievement. For example, when money is tied to goal attainment, we may focus on getting the money and become willing to compromise ourselves ethically. If we are instead primed with thoughts about how we are spending our time when we are pursuing the goal, we are more likely to act more ethically.46 However, this result is limited to thoughts about how we are spending our time. If we are put under time pressure and worry about that, thoughts about time turn against us. Time pressure often increases as we are nearing a goal, which can tempt us to act unethically to achieve it.47 Specifically, we may forego mastering tasks and adopt avoidance techniques so we don’t look bad,48 both of which can incline us toward unethical choices.

Other Contemporary Theories of Motivation Self-determination theory and goal-setting theory are well supported contem- porary theories of motivation. But they are far from the only noteworthy OB theories on the subject. Self-efficacy, reinforcement, equity/organizational justice, and expectancy theories reveal different aspects of our motivational processes and tendencies. We begin with the concept of self-efficacy.

7-4 Demonstrate the differ-ences among self-efficacy theory, reinforcement theory, equity theory, and expectancy theory.

Cascading of objectivesExhibit 7-4

Overall organizational

objectives

Divisional objectives

Departmental objectives

Individual objectives

XYZ Company

Industrial products divisionConsumer products division

Production Sales Marketing Research DevelopmentCustomerservice

220 PART 2 The Individual

Self-efficacy theory Self-efficacy theory, also known as social cognitive theory or social learning theory, refers to an individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task.49 The higher your self-efficacy, the more confidence you have in your ability to succeed. So, in difficult situations, people with low self-efficacy are more likely to lessen their effort or give up altogether, while those with high self-efficacy will try harder to master the challenge.50 Self-efficacy can create a positive spiral in which those with high efficacy become more engaged in their tasks and then, in turn, increase performance, which increases efficacy further.51 One recent study introduced a further explanation, in that self-efficacy was associated with a higher level of focused attention, which led to increased task performance.52

Feedback influences self-efficacy; individuals high in self-efficacy seem to respond to negative feedback with increased effort and motivation, while those low in self-efficacy are likely to lessen their effort after negative feedback.53 Changes in self-efficacy over time are related to changes in creative perfor- mance as well.54 How can managers help their employees achieve high levels of self-efficacy? By bringing goal-setting theory and self-efficacy theory together.

Goal-setting theory and self-efficacy theory don’t compete; they complement each other. As Exhibit 7-5 shows, employees whose managers set difficult goals for them will have a higher level of self-efficacy and set higher goals for their own performance. Why? Setting difficult goals for people communicates your confidence in them.

increasing Self-efficacy in yourself The researcher who developed self-efficacy theory, Albert Bandura, proposes four ways self-efficacy can be increased:55

1. Enactive mastery. 2. Vicarious modeling. 3. Verbal persuasion. 4. Arousal.

self-efficacy theory An individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task.

Joint effects of Goals and Self-efficacy on performanceExhibit 7-5

Source: Based on E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham, “Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-Year

Odyssey,” American Psychologist (September 2002): 705–17.

Individual has higher level of job

or task performance

Manager sets difficult, specific

goal for job or task

Individual sets higher personal

(self-set) goal for his or her performance

Individual has confidence that given level of performance

will be attained (self-efficacy)

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 221

The most important source of increasing self-efficacy is enactive mastery—that is, gaining relevant experience with the task or job. If you’ve been able to do the job successfully in the past, you’re more confident you can do it in the future.

The second source is vicarious modeling—becoming more confident because you see someone else doing the task. If your friend quits smoking, it increases your confidence that you can quit, too. Vicarious modeling is most effective when you see yourself as similar to the person you are observing. Watching Tiger Woods play a difficult golf shot might not increase your confidence in being able to play the shot yourself, but if you watch a golfer with a handicap similar to yours, it’s persuasive.

The third source is verbal persuasion: we become more confident when some- one convinces us we have the skills necessary to be successful. Motivational speakers use this tactic.

Finally, arousal increases self-efficacy. Arousal leads to an energized state, so we get “psyched up,” feel up to the task, and perform better. But if the task requires a steady, lower-key perspective (say, carefully editing a manuscript), arousal may in fact hurt performance even as it increases self-efficacy because we might hurry through the task.

Intelligence and personality are absent from Bandura’s list, but they too can increase self-efficacy.56 People who are intelligent, conscientious, and emotion- ally stable are so much more likely to have high self-efficacy that some research- ers argue self-efficacy is less important than prior research would suggest.57 They believe it is partially a by-product in a smart person with a confident personality.

influencing Self-efficacy in others The best way for a manager to use verbal persuasion is through the Pygmalion effect, a term based on a Greek myth about a sculptor (Pygmalion) who fell in love with a statue he carved. The Pygmalion effect is a form of self-fulfilling prophecy in which believing something can make it true. Here, it is often used to describe “that what one person expects of another can come to serve a self-fulfilling prophecy.”58 An example should make this clear. In studies, teachers were told their students had very high IQ scores when, in fact, they spanned a range from high to low. Consistent with the Pygmalion effect, the teachers spent more time with the students they thought were smart, gave them more challenging assignments, and expected more of them—all of which led to higher student self-efficacy and better achievement outcomes.59 This strategy has been used in the workplace too, with replicable results and enhanced effects when leader-subordinate relationships are strong.60

Training programs often make use of enactive mastery by having people prac- tice and build their skills. In fact, one reason training works is that it increases self-efficacy, particularly when the training is interactive and feedback is given after training.61 Individuals with higher levels of self-efficacy also appear to reap more benefits from training programs and are more likely to use their training on the job.62

reinforcement theory Goal-setting is a cognitive approach, proposing that an individual’s purposes direct his or her action. Reinforcement theory, in contrast, takes a behavioris- tic view, arguing that reinforcement conditions behavior. The two theories are clearly philosophically at odds. Reinforcement theorists see behavior as envi- ronmentally caused. You need not be concerned, they would argue, with inter- nal cognitive events; what controls behavior are reinforcers—any consequences that, when they immediately follow responses, increase the probability that the behavior will be repeated.

reinforcement theory A theory that says that behavior is a function of its consequences.

222 PART 2 The Individual

Reinforcement theory ignores the inner state of the individual and concen- trates solely on what happens when he or she takes some action. Because it does not concern itself with what initiates behavior, it is not, strictly speaking, a theory of motivation. But it does provide a powerful means of analyzing what controls behavior, and this is why we typically consider it in discussions of motivation.63

operant Conditioning/behaviorism and reinforcement Operant conditioning theory, probably the most relevant component of reinforcement theory for management, argues that people learn to behave to get something they want or to avoid some- thing they don’t want. Unlike reflexive or unlearned behavior, operant behavior is influenced by the reinforcement or lack of reinforcement brought about by con- sequences. Reinforcement strengthens a behavior and increases the likelihood it will be repeated.64

B. F. Skinner, one of the most prominent advocates of operant condition- ing, demonstrated that people will most likely engage in desired behaviors if they are positively reinforced for doing so; rewards are most effective if they immediately follow the desired response; and behavior that is not rewarded, or is punished, is less likely to be repeated. The concept of operant conditioning was part of Skinner’s broader concept of behaviorism, which argues that behav- ior follows stimuli in a relatively unthinking manner. Skinner’s form of radical behaviorism rejects feelings, thoughts, and other states of mind as causes of behavior. In short, people learn to associate stimulus and response, but their conscious awareness of this association is irrelevant.65

behaviorism A theory that argues that behavior follows stimuli in a relatively unthinking manner.

T echnology is a great thing. The Internet provides us with instant access to an abundance of in- formation, and smartphones allow us to stay easily connected with others through e-mail, texting, tweeting, and conversation. Yet that ease of connectiv- ity has also given employees the sinking feeling they are being watched . . . and they are right. But is it ethical?

Some companies are using tech- nology to track their employees’ activi- ties, and some of this tracking is done in the name of science. For example, Bank of America Corp. wanted to learn whether face-to-face interaction made a difference to the productivity of its call- center teams, so it asked around 100 workers to wear badges for a few weeks that tracked their whereabouts. Discov- ering that the most productive workers interacted most frequently with others, the company scheduled work breaks for groups rather than individually. This is a

nice outcome, but how did the monitor- ing affect the behavior and motivation of the workers?

Other companies track employees to ensure they are hard at work, which risks completely demotivating some. Accurate Biometrics, for example, uses computer monitoring to oversee its telecommuters. Says Timothy Daniels, VP of operations, looking at websites his employees have visited “enables us to keep a watchful eye without be- ing overinvasive.” Currently, around 70 percent of organizations monitor their employees.

Practically speaking, managers may not want to adopt technologies that demotivate their employees through micromanagement. Perhaps more im- portantly, though, how can they use monitoring technology ethically in workplace applications? First and fore- most, employees should be informed their activities will be tracked. Second,

the purpose of tracking should be made clear to employees. Are workers being monitored to learn something that might help them and the organi- zation as a whole? Or are they being monitored to ensure they never slack off? Finally, it should be made clear which behaviors are inappropriate. Tak- ing a legitimate work break is different from spending hours on a social net- working site. These guidelines should increase the likelihood that monitoring programs are accepted and perceived to be fair.

Sources: S. Shellenbarger, “Working from Home without Slacking Off,” The Wall Street Journal, July 13–15, 2012, 29; R. Richmond, “3 Tips for Legally and Ethi- cally Monitoring Employees Online,” En- trepreneur, May 31, 2012, http://www .entrepreneur.com/article/223686; and R. E. Silverman, “Tracking Sensors Invade the Workplace,” The Wall Street Journal, March 7, 2003, www.wsj.com.

Motivated by big brother an ethical Choice

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 223

You can see illustrations of operant conditioning everywhere. For instance, a commissioned salesperson wanting to earn a sizable income finds doing so is contingent on generating high sales in his territory, so he sells as much as possi- ble. Of course, the linkage can also teach individuals to engage in behaviors that work against the best interests of the organization. Assume your boss says if you work overtime during the next 3-week busy season you’ll be compensated for it at your next performance appraisal. However, when performance-appraisal time comes, you are given no positive reinforcement for your overtime work. The next time your boss asks you to work overtime, what will you do? You’ll probably decline!

Social-learning theory and reinforcement Individuals can learn by being told or by observing what happens to other people, as well as through direct experience. Much of what we have learned comes from watching models— parents, teachers, peers, film and television performers, bosses, and so forth. The view that we can learn through both observation and direct experience is called social-learning theory.66

Although social-learning theory is an extension of operant conditioning— that is, it assumes behavior is a function of consequences—it also acknowledges the effects of observational learning and perception. People respond to the way they perceive and define consequences, not to the objective consequences themselves.

Models are central to the social-learning viewpoint. Four processes deter- mine their influence on an individual:

1. Attentional processes. People learn from a model only when they recog- nize and pay attention to its critical features. We tend to be most influenced by models that are attractive, repeatedly available, important to us, or simi- lar to us (in our estimation).

2. Retention processes. A model’s influence depends on how well the indi- vidual remembers the model’s action after the model is no longer readily available.

social-learning theory The view that we can learn through both observation and direct experience.

At Thai Takenaka, a leading construction firm in Thailand, experienced employees teach younger workers construction management skills, building techniques, and the basics of craftsmanship through training by “looking, touching, and realization.” This social learning view helps employees succeed in meeting the firm’s high standards of quality and efficiency. Source: Kyodo/Newscom

224 PART 2 The Individual

3. Motor reproduction processes. After a person has seen a new behavior by observing the model, watching must be converted to doing. This process demonstrates that the individual can perform the modeled activities.

4. Reinforcement processes. Individuals are motivated to exhibit the modeled behavior if positive incentives or rewards are provided. Positively reinforced behaviors are given more attention, learned better, and per- formed more often.

equity theory/organizational Justice Ainsley is a student working toward a bachelor’s degree in finance. In order to gain some work experience and increase her marketability, she has accepted a summer internship in the finance department at a pharmaceutical company. She is quite pleased at the pay: $15 an hour is more than other students in her cohort receive for their summer internships. At work she meets Josh, a recent graduate working as a middle manager in the same finance department. Josh makes $30 an hour.

On the job, Ainsley is a go-getter. She’s engaged, satisfied, and always seems willing to help others. Josh is the opposite. He often seems disinterested in his job and entertains thoughts about quitting. When pressed one day about why he is unhappy, Josh cites his pay as the main reason. Specifically, he tells Ains- ley that, compared to managers at other pharmaceutical companies, he makes much less. “It isn’t fair,” he complains. “I work just as hard as they do, yet I don’t make as much. Maybe I should go work for the competition.”

How could someone making $30 an hour be less satisfied with his pay than someone making $15 an hour and be less motivated as a result? The answer lies in equity theory and, more broadly, in principles of organizational justice. According to equity theory, employees compare what they get from their job (their “Outcomes,” such as pay, promotions, recognition, or a bigger office) to what they put into it (their “Inputs,” such as effort, experience, and educa- tion). They take the ratio of their outcomes to their inputs and compare it to the ratio of others, usually someone similar like a coworker or someone doing the same job. This is shown in Exhibit 7-6. If we believe our ratio is equal to those with whom we compare ourselves, a state of equity exists and we perceive our situation as fair.

Based on equity theory, employees who perceive inequity will make one of six choices:67

1. Change inputs (exert less effort if underpaid or more if overpaid). 2. Change outcomes (individuals paid on a piece-rate basis can increase their

pay by producing a higher quantity of units of lower quality).

equity theory A theory that says that individuals compare their job inputs and outcomes with those of others and then respond to eliminate any inequities.

equity theoryExhibit 7-6

Ratio Comparisons* Perception

Inequity due to being underrewarded

Equity

Inequity due to being overrewarded

*Where represents the employee and represents relevant othersO IB

O IA

> O IB

O IA

= O IB

O IA

< O IB

O IA

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 225

3. Distort perceptions of self (“I used to think I worked at a moderate pace, but now I realize I work a lot harder than everyone else”).

4. Distort perceptions of others (“Mike’s job isn’t as desirable as I thought”). 5. Choose a different referent (“I may not make as much as my brother-in-law,

but I’m doing a lot better than my Dad did when he was my age”). 6. Leave the field (quit the job).

Equity theory has support from some researchers, but not from all.68 There are some concerns with the propositions. First, inequities created by overpay- ment do not seem to significantly affect behavior in most work situations. So don’t expect an employee who feels overpaid to give back part of his salary or put in more hours to make up for the inequity. Although individuals may some- times perceive that they are overrewarded, they restore equity by rationalizing their situation (“I’m worth it because I work harder than everyone else”). Sec- ond, not everyone is equally equity-sensitive, for various reasons, including feel- ings of entitlement.69 Others actually prefer outcome–input ratios lower than the referent comparisons. Predictions from equity theory are not likely to be very accurate about these “benevolent types.”70

Although equity theory’s propositions have not all held up, the hypothe- sis served as an important precursor to the study of organizational justice, or more simply fairness, in the workplace.71 Organizational justice is concerned more broadly with how employees feel authorities and decision-makers at work treat them. For the most part, employees evaluate how fairly they are treated, as shown in Exhibit 7-7.

distributive Justice Distributive justice is concerned with the fairness of the outcomes, such as pay and recognition that employees receive. Outcomes can

organizational justice An overall perception of what is fair in the workplace, composed of distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice.

distributive justice Perceived fairness of the amount and allocation of rewards among individuals.

Model of organizational JusticeExhibit 7-7

Organizational Justice

Definition: overall perception of what is fair in the workplace

Example: I think this is a fair place to work.

Distributive Justice Definition: perceived fairness of outcome

Example: I got the pay raise I deserved.

Procedural Justice Definition: perceived fairness of process used to determine outcome

Example: I had input into the process used to give raises and was given a good explanation of why I received the raise I did.

Interactional Justice Definition: perceived degree to which one is treated with dignity and respect

Example: When telling me about my raise, my supervisor was very nice and complimentary.

226 PART 2 The Individual

be allocated in many ways. For example, we could distribute raises equally among employees, or we could base them on which employees need money the most. However, as we discussed about equity theory, employees tend to perceive their outcomes are fairest when they are distributed equitably.

Does the same logic apply to teams? At first glance, it would seem that dis- tributing rewards equally among team members is best for boosting morale and teamwork—that way, no one is favored more than another. A study of U.S. National Hockey League teams suggests otherwise. Differentiating the pay of team members on the basis of their inputs (how well they performed in games) attracted better players to the team, made it more likely they would stay, and increased team performance.72

The way we have described things so far, it would seem that individuals gauge distributive justice and equity in a rational, calculative way as they compare their outcome–input ratios to those of others. But the experience of justice, and espe- cially of injustice, is often not so cold and calculated. Instead, people base dis- tributive judgments on a feeling or an emotional reaction to the way they think they are being treated relative to others, and their reactions are often “hot” and emotional rather than cool and rational.73

procedural Justice Although employees care a lot about what outcomes are distributed (distributive justice), they also care about how they are distributed. While distributive justice looks at what outcomes are allocated, procedural justice examines how.74 For one, employees perceive that procedures are fairer when they are given a say in the decision-making process. Having direct influ- ence over how decisions or made, or at the very least being able to present our opinion to decision makers, creates a sense of control and makes us feel empowered (we discuss empowerment more in the next chapter). Employees also perceive that procedures are fairer when decision makers follow several “rules.” These include making decisions in a consistent manner (across people and over time), avoiding bias (not favoring one group or person over another), using accurate information, considering the groups or people their decisions affect, acting ethically, and remaining open to appeals or correction.

procedural justice The perceived fairness of the process used to determine the distribution of rewards.

As part of its “Putting Employees First” belief, The Container Store involves employees in the decision- making process by empowering them to make decisions that directly affect how they work. This contributes to a sense of procedural justice for employees like Krysy Winden, shown here, and can result in higher job satisfaction and trust. Source: Richard Sennott/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 227

If outcomes are favorable and individuals get what they want, they care less about the process, so procedural justice doesn’t matter as much when distribu- tions are perceived to be fair. It’s when outcomes are unfavorable that peo- ple pay close attention to the process. If the process is judged to be fair, then employees are more accepting of unfavorable outcomes.75

Why is this the case? It’s likely that employees believe fair procedures, which often have long-lasting effects, will eventually result in a fair outcome, even if the immediate outcome is unfair. Think about it. If you are hoping for a raise and your manager informs you that you did not receive one, you’ll probably want to know how raises were determined. If it turns out your manager allocated raises based on merit and you were simply outperformed by a coworker, then you’re more likely to accept your manager’s decision than if raises were based on favoritism. Of course, if you get the raise in the first place, then you’ll be less concerned with how the decision was made.

informational Justice Beyond outcomes and procedures, research has shown that employees care about two other types of fairness that have to do with the way they are treated during interactions with others. The first type is informational justice, which reflects whether managers provide employees with explanations for key decisions and keep them informed of important organizational matters. The more detailed and candid managers are with employees, the more fairly treated those employees feel.

Though it may seem obvious that managers should be honest with their employees and not keep them in the dark about organizational matters, many managers are hesitant to share information. This is especially the case with bad news, which is uncomfortable for both the manager delivering it and the employee receiving it. Explanations for bad news are beneficial when they take the form of excuses after the fact (“I know this is bad, and I wanted to give you the office, but it wasn’t my decision”) rather than justifications (“I decided to give the office to Sam, but having it isn’t a big deal”).76

interpersonal Justice The second type of justice relevant to interactions between managers and employees is interpersonal justice, which reflects whether employees are treated with dignity and respect. Compared to the other forms of justice we’ve discussed, interpersonal justice is unique in that it can occur in everyday interactions between managers and employees.77 This quality allows managers to take advantage of (or miss out on) opportunities to make their employees feel fairly treated. Many managers may view treating employees politely and respectfully as too “soft,” choosing more aggressive tac- tics out of a belief that doing so will be more motivating. Although displays of negative emotions such as anger may be motivating in some cases,78 managers sometimes take this too far. Consider former Rutgers University men’s basket- ball coach Mike Rice who was caught on video verbally and even physically abusing players and was subsequently fired.79

Justice outcomes After all this talk about types of justice, how much does justice really matter to employees? A great deal, as it turns out. When employees feel fairly treated, they respond in a number of positive ways. All the types of justice discussed in this section have been linked to higher levels of task performance and citizenship behaviors such as helping cowork- ers, as well as lower levels of counterproductive behaviors such as shirking job duties. Distributive and procedural justice are more strongly associated with task performance, while informational and interpersonal justice are more strongly associated with citizenship behavior. Even more physiological

informational justice The degree to which employees are provided truthful explanations for decisions.

interpersonal justice The degree to which employees are treated with dignity and respect.

228 PART 2 The Individual

outcomes, such as how well employees sleep and the state of their health, have been linked to fair treatment.80

Why does justice have these positive effects? Fair treatment enhances com- mitment to the organization and makes employees feel it cares about their well-being. In addition, employees who feel fairly treated trust their supervisors more, which reduces uncertainty and fear of being exploited by the organi- zation. Finally, fair treatment elicits positive emotions, which in turn prompts behaviors like citizenship.81

Despite all attempts to enhance fairness, perceived injustices are still likely to occur. Fairness is often subjective; what one person sees as unfair, another may see as perfectly appropriate. In general, people see allocations or procedures favoring themselves as fair.82 So, when addressing perceived injustices, manag- ers need to focus their actions on the source of the problem. In addition, if employees feel they have been treated unjustly, having opportunities to express their frustration has been shown to reduce their desire for retribution.83

ensuring Justice How can an organization affect the justice perceptions and rule adherence of its managers? This depends upon the motivation of each man- ager. Some managers are likely to calculate justice by their degree of adherence to the justice rules of the organization. These managers will try to gain greater subordinate compliance with behavioral expectations, create an identity of being fair to their employees, or establish norms of fairness. Other managers may be motivated in justice decisions by their emotions. When they have a high positive affect and/or a low negative affect, these managers are most likely to act fairly.

It might be tempting for organizations to adopt strong justice guidelines in attempts to mandate managerial behavior, but this isn’t likely to be universally effective. In cases where managers have more rules and less discretion, those who calculate justice are more likely to act fairly, but managers whose justice behavior follows from their affect may act more fairly when they have greater discretion.84

Culture and Justice Across nations, the same basic principles of procedural jus- tice are respected in that workers around the world prefer rewards based on performance and skills over rewards based on seniority.85 However, inputs and outcomes are valued differently in various cultures.86

We may think of justice differences in terms of Hofstede’s cultural dimen- sions (see Chapter 5). One large-scale study of over 190,000 employees in 32 countries and regions suggested that justice perceptions are most important to people in countries with individualistic, feminine, uncertainty avoidance, and low power-distance values.87 Organizations can tailor programs to meet these justice expectations. For example, in countries that are highest in indi- vidualism, such as Australia and the United States, competitive pay plans and rewards for superior individual performance will enhance feelings of justice. In countries dominated by uncertainty avoidance, such as France, fixed pay com- pensation and employee participation may help employees feel more secure. The dominant dimension in Sweden is femininity, so relational concerns are considered important. Swedish organizations may therefore want to provide work-life balance initiatives and social recognition. Austria, in contrast, has a strong low power-distance value. Ethical concerns may be foremost to individu- als in perceiving justice in Austrian organizations, so it will be important for organizations to justify inequality between leaders and workers and provide symbols of ethical leadership.

We can also look at other cultural factors. Some cultures emphasize status over individual achievement as a basis for allocating resources. Materialistic cul- tures are more likely to see cash compensation and rewards as the most relevant

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 229

outcomes of work, whereas relational cultures will see social rewards and status as important outcomes. International managers must consider the cultural preferences of each group of employees when determining what is “fair” in different contexts.

expectancy theory One of the most widely accepted explanations of motivation is Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory.88 Although it has critics, most evidence supports the theory.89

Expectancy theory argues that the strength of our tendency to act a certain way depends on the strength of our expectation of a given outcome and its attractiveness. In practical terms, employees will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when they believe that it will lead to a good performance appraisal, that a good appraisal will lead to organizational rewards such as salary increases and/or intrinsic rewards, and that the rewards will satisfy their personal goals. The theory, therefore, focuses on three relationships (see Exhibit 7-8):

1. Effort–performance relationship. The probability perceived by the indi- vidual that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to performance.

2. Performance–reward relationship. The degree to which the individual be- lieves performing at a particular level will lead to the attainment of a desired outcome.

expectancy theory A theory that says that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual.

expectancy theoryExhibit 7-8

Individual effort

1 2 3Individual performance

Effort–performance relationship Performance–reward relationship Rewards–personal goals relationship

Organizational rewards

Personal goals

1

2

3

The performance–reward relationship is strong at Mary Kay Cosmetics, which offers a rewards and recognition program based on the achievement of personal goals set by each sales- person. The women shown here in China pose before a pink sedan, one of many rewards that motivate Mary Kay’s independent sales force. Source: China Photos/Getty Images

230 PART 2 The Individual

3. Rewards–personal goals relationship. The degree to which organizational rewards satisfy an individual’s personal goals or needs and the attractiveness of those potential rewards for the individual.90

Expectancy theory helps explain why a lot of workers aren’t motivated on their jobs and do only the minimum necessary to get by. Let’s frame the theory’s three relationships as questions employees need to answer in the affirmative if their motivation is to be maximized.

First, if I give maximum effort, will it be recognized in my performance appraisal? For many employees, the answer is “no.” Why? Their skill level may be deficient, which means no matter how hard they try, they’re not likely to be high per- formers. Or the organization’s performance appraisal system may be designed to assess non-performance factors such as loyalty, initiative, or courage, which means more effort won’t necessarily result in a higher evaluation. Another pos- sibility is that employees, rightly or wrongly, perceive the boss doesn’t like them. As a result, they expect a poor appraisal, regardless of effort. These examples suggest that people will be motivated only if they perceive a link between their effort and their performance.

Second, if I get a good performance appraisal, will it lead to organizational rewards? Many organizations reward things besides performance. When pay is based on factors such as having seniority, being cooperative, or “kissing up” to the boss, employees are likely to see the performance–reward relationship as weak and demotivating.

Finally, if I’m rewarded, are the rewards attractive to me? The employee works hard in the hope of getting a promotion but gets a pay raise instead. Or the employee wants a more interesting and challenging job but receives only a few words of praise. Unfortunately, many managers are limited in the rewards they can distribute, which makes it difficult to tailor rewards to individual employee needs. Some managers incorrectly assume all employees want the same thing, thus overlooking the motivational effects of differentiating rewards. In these cases, employee motivation is submaximized.

As a vivid example of how expectancy theory can work, consider stock analysts. They make their living trying to forecast a stock’s future price; the accuracy of their buy, sell, or hold recommendations is what keeps them in work or gets them fired. But the dynamics are not simple. Analysts place few sell ratings on stocks, although in a steady market, by definition, as many stocks are falling as are rising. Expectancy theory provides an explanation: Analysts who place a sell rating on a company’s stock have to balance the benefits they receive by being accurate against the risks they run by drawing that company’s ire. What are these risks? They include public rebuke, profes- sional blackballing, and exclusion from information. When analysts place a buy rating on a stock, they face no such trade-off because, obviously, compa- nies love it when analysts recommend that investors buy their stock. So the incentive structure suggests the expected outcome of buy ratings is higher than the expected outcome of sell ratings, and that’s why buy ratings vastly outnumber sell ratings.91

PeRsonAl InvenToRy AssessMenTs Work Motivation Indicator Do you find that some jobs motivate you more than others? Take this PIA to determine your work motivation.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 231

Job Engagement When Joseph reports to his job as a hospital nurse, it seems that everything else in his life goes away, and he becomes completely absorbed in what he is doing. His emotions, thoughts, and behavior are all directed toward patient care. In fact, he can get so caught up in his work that he isn’t even aware of how long he’s been there. As a result of this total commitment, he is more effective in providing patient care and feels uplifted by his time at work.

Joseph has a high level of job engagement, the investment of an employee’s physical, cognitive, and emotional energies into job performance.92 Practicing managers and scholars have become interested in facilitating job engagement, believing factors deeper than liking a job or finding it interesting drives perfor- mance. Studies attempt to measure this deeper level of commitment.

The Gallup organization has been studying the extent to which employee engagement is linked to positive work outcomes for millions of employees over the past 30 years.93 They have found there are far more engaged employees in highly successful organizations than in average ones, and groups with more engaged employees have higher levels of productivity, fewer safety incidents, and lower turnover. Academic studies have also found positive outcomes. For instance, one review found higher levels of engagement were associated with task performance and citizenship behavior.94

What makes people more likely to be engaged in their jobs? One key is the degree to which an employee believes it is meaningful to engage in work. This is partially determined by job characteristics and access to sufficient resources to work effectively.95 Another factor is a match between the individual’s values and those of the organization.96 Leadership behaviors that inspire workers to a greater sense of mission also increase employee engagement.97

One of the critiques of the concept of engagement is that the construct is par- tially redundant with job attitudes like satisfaction or stress.98 However, engage- ment questionnaires usually assess motivation and absorption in a task, quite unlike job satisfaction questionnaires. Engagement may also predict impor- tant work outcomes better than traditional job attitudes.99 Other critics note there may be a “dark side” to engagement, as evidenced by positive relation- ships between engagement and work–family conflict.100 It is possible individuals might grow so engaged in their work roles that family responsibilities become an unwelcome intrusion. Also, an overly high level of engagement can lead to a loss of perspective and, ultimately, burnout. Further research exploring how engagement relates to these negative outcomes may help clarify whether some highly engaged employees might be getting “too much of a good thing.”

7-5 Identify the implications of employee job engagement for managers.

job engagement The investment of an employee’s physical, cognitive, and emotional energies into job performance.

try It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: Motivation.

Integrating Contemporary Theories of Motivation Our job might be simpler if, after presenting a half dozen theories, we could say only one was found valid. But many of the theories in this chapter are complemen- tary. We now tie them together to help you understand their interrelationships.

7-6 Describe how the contemporary theories of motivation complement one another.

232 PART 2 The Individual

Exhibit 7-9 integrates much of what we know about motivation. Its basic foundation is the expectancy model that was shown in Exhibit 7-8. Let’s walk through Exhibit 7-9. (We will look at job design closely in Chapter 8.)

We begin by explicitly recognizing that opportunities can either aid or hinder individual effort. The individual effort box on the left also has another arrow leading into it, from the person’s goals. Consistent with goal-setting theory, the goals–effort loop is meant to remind us that goals direct behavior.

Expectancy theory predicts employees will exert a high level of effort if they perceive a strong relationship between effort and performance, performance and reward, and rewards and satisfaction of personal goals. Each of these rela- tionships is, in turn, influenced by other factors. For effort to lead to good performance, the individual must have the ability to perform and perceive the performance appraisal system as fair and objective. The performance–reward relationship will be strong if the individual perceives that performance (rather than seniority, personal favorites, or other criteria) is rewarded. If cognitive evaluation theory were fully valid in the actual workplace, we would predict that basing rewards on performance should decrease the individual’s intrinsic moti- vation. The final link in expectancy theory is the rewards–goals relationship. Motivation is high if the rewards for high performance satisfy the dominant needs consistent with individual goals.

A closer look at Exhibit 7-9 also reveals that the model considers achieve- ment motivation, job design, reinforcement, and equity theories/organizational justice. A high achiever is not motivated by an organization’s assessment of per- formance or organizational rewards, hence the jump from effort to personal

integrating Contemporary theories of MotivationExhibit 7-9

Individual performance

Organizational rewards

Personal goals

Opportunity Ability Performance evaluation

criteria

High nAch

Equity comparison/ Organizational justice

Objective performance evaluation

system

Individual effort

Reinforcement Dominant needs

Goals direct behavior

Job design

O IA IB

O:

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 233

goals for those with a high nAch. Remember, high achievers are internally driven as long as their jobs provide them with personal responsibility, feedback, and moderate risks. They are not concerned with the effort– performance, performance–reward, or rewards–goal linkages.

Reinforcement theory enters the model by recognizing that the organiza- tion’s rewards reinforce the individual’s performance. If employees see a reward system as “paying off” for good performance, the rewards will reinforce and encourage good performance. Rewards also play a key part in organizational justice research. Individuals will judge the favorability of their outcomes (for example, their pay) relative to what others receive but also with respect to how they are treated: When people are disappointed in their rewards, they are likely to be sensitive to the perceived fairness of the procedures used and the consid- eration given to them by their supervisors.

Summary The motivation theories in this chapter differ in their predictive strength. Maslow’s hierarchy, two-factor theory, and McClelland’s theory focus on needs. Self-determination theory and related theories have merits to consider. Goal-setting theory can be helpful but does not cover absenteeism, turnover, or job satisfaction. Self-efficacy theory contributes to our understanding of per- sonal motivation. Reinforcement theory can also be helpful, but not regarding employee satisfaction or the decision to quit. Equity theory provided the spark for research on organizational justice. Expectancy theory can be helpful, but assumes employees have few constraints on decision making, and this limits its applicability. Job engagement goes a long way toward explaining employee commitment.

Implications for Managers ●● Make sure extrinsic rewards for employees are not viewed as coercive, but

instead provide information about competence and relatedness. ●● Consider goal-setting theory: Clear and difficult goals often lead to higher

levels of employee productivity. ●● Consider reinforcement theory regarding quality and quantity of work,

persistence of effort, absenteeism, tardiness, and accident rates. ●● Consult equity theory to help understand productivity, satisfaction,

absence, and turnover variables. ●● Expectancy theory offers a powerful explanation of performance variables

such as employee productivity, absenteeism, and turnover.

234 PART 2 The Individual

goals get You to Where You Want to be

Sure, a lot of research has shown the benefits of goal-setting, but those studies ignore the harm that’s often done. For one, how often have you set a “stretch” goal, only to see yourself later fail? Goals create anxiety and worry about reaching them, and they often create unrealistic expectations as well. Imagine those who set a goal to earn a promotion in a certain period of time (a specific, difficult goal), only to find themselves laid off once a recession hit. or how about those who envision a retirement of leisure yet are forced to take on a part-time job or delay retirement altogether in order to continue making ends meet. When too many influential factors are out of our control, our difficult goals become impossible.

or, consider this: Goals can lead to unethical behavior and poorer performance. How many reports have you heard over the years about teachers who “fudged” students’ test scores in order to achieve edu- cational standards? Another example: When Ken o’Brian, as a pro- fessional quarterback for the new york Jets, was penalized for every interception he threw, he achieved his goal of fewer interceptions quite easily—by refusing to throw the ball even when he should have.

In addition to this anecdotal evidence, research has directly linked goal-setting to cheating. We should heed the warning of Professor Maurice e. schweitzer—“Goal-setting is like a powerful medication”— before blindly accepting that specific, difficult goal.

CounTerpoInT

Of course this is a true statement. Goal-setting theory is one of the best-supported theories in the motivation literature. study after study has consistently shown the benefits of goals. Want to excel on a test, lose a certain amount of weight, secure a job with a particular income level, or improve your golf game? If you want to be a high performer, merely set a specific, difficult goal and let nature take its course. That goal will dominate your attention, cause you to focus, and make you try harder.

All too often, people are told by others to simply “do their best.” Could anything be more vague? What does “do your best” actually mean? Maybe you feel that your “best” on one day is to muster a grade of 50 percent on an exam, while your “best” on another day is an 80. But if you were given a more difficult goal—say, to score a 95 on the exam—and you were committed to that goal, you would ultimately perform better.

edwin locke and Gary latham, the researchers best known for goal-setting theory, put it best when they said: “The effects of goal set- ting are very reliable.” In short, goal-setting theory is among the most valid and practical theories of motivation in organizational psychology.

poInT

Sources: e. A. locke and G. P. latham, “Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal setting and Task Motivation,” American Psychologist 57 (2002): 705–71; A. Tugend, “expert’s Advice to the Goal-oriented: Don’t overdo It,” The New York Times, october 6, 2012, B5; and C. Richards, “letting Go of long-Term Goals,” The New York Times, August 4, 2012.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 235

cHaPter revieW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QuestiOns fOr revieW

7-1 What are the three key elements of motivation? 7-2 What are some early theories of motivation? How applicable are they today?

7-3 What are the similarities and differences between self-determination theory and goal-setting theory?

7-4 What are the key principles of self-efficacy theory, reinforcement theory, equity theory, and expectancy theory?

7-5 Why is employee job engagement important to managers?

7-6 How do the contemporary theories of motivation compare to one another?

exPerientiaL exercise Organizational Justice Task Break the class into groups of three or four.

7-7. Each person should recall an instance in which he or she was (a) treated especially fairly and (b) treated especially unfairly. Work-related instances are preferable, but nonwork exam- ples are fine too. What do the stories have in common?

7-8. Spend several minutes discussing whether the instance was more distributive, procedural, informational, or interpersonal in nature. What

was the source of the fair/unfair treatment? How did you feel, and how did you respond?

7-9. Each group should develop a set of recommenda- tions for handling the unfair situations in a fairer manner. Select a leader for your group who will briefly summarize the unfair instances, along with the group’s recommendations for handling them better. The discussion should reflect the four types of justice discussed in this chapter (distributive, procedural, informational, and interpersonal).

etHicaL DiLeMMa The New GPA In the college classroom, is an A the new B? Grade infla- tion is of particular concern in graduate programs, where it is not uncommon for 75 percent of grades to be As. In fact, the most frequent grade given in U.S. universities is an A, by 43 percent. This percentage has risen from 30 percent 20 years ago, representing a significant increase. And at Harvard, the average grade is an A-. While this may sound like a great place to be, there is a powerful downside to grade inflation. If an A- is the new class aver- age, the crowding of grades at the top end of the scale can sap away the student’s motivation to work hard. Organiza- tions also have a tougher time of evaluating candidates’

transcripts if grades are inflated, which means they must rely more on results of standardized tests, often ones that were taken in high school, that may not reflect a student’s current or best capabilities. Professors too may be less motivated to accurately assess and teach students through strong grading feedback that would help students learn.

There is no easy solution to the phenomenon of grade inflation. In a culture where “everyone does it,” schools that take a stand against grade inflation produce students with potentially lower grades—but no less education— than their peers. These students may not be able to stand out in the increasingly competitive job market even when

236 PART 2 The Individual

Sources: A. Ellin, “Failure Is Not an Option,” The New York Times, April 15, 2012, 13–14; A. Massoia, “The New Normal: The Problem of Grade Inflation in American Schools,” The Huffington Post, January 12, 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/angelina-massoia/the-new-normal-the-proble_b_6146236 .html15; and S. Slavov, “How to Fix College Grade Inflation,” US News, December 26, 2013, http:// www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2013/12/26/why- college-grade-inflation-is- a-real-problem-and-how-to-fix-it.

they are equally prepared. Over time, their schools will not be able to boast of the accomplishments of their graduates in terms of grades and employment placements. No longer will these schools look as attractive to potential students, so enrollment and thus revenue will suffer, endangering the institution’s ability to teach. Therefore, eliminating grade inflation poses powerful disincentives, and few if any col- leges have successfully tried it. There is much more moti- vation for organizations, schools, professors, and students to continue grade inflation practices, even though they may be wrong.

Questions 7-10. How might forcing equitable grade distributions

with C as average motivate students? 7-11. If around 75 percent of grades in graduate

programs are As, have grades become meaningless as motivators?

7-12. State funding of many schools has decreased dramatically over the years, increasing the pressure on administrators to generate revenue through tuition increases and other means. How might this pressure create ethical tensions among the need to generate revenue, student retention, and grading?

case inciDent 1 The Demotivation of CEO Pay Quick: How much did your CEO get paid this year? What did any CEO get paid? You may not know the exact amounts, but you probably think the answer is, “Too much money.” According to research from 40 countries that probed the thoughts of CEOs, cabinet ministers, and unskilled employees, we all think leaders should be paid less. Beyond that, we are clueless.

Where we err can be calculated by an organization’s pay ratio, or the ratio between CEO pay and average worker pay. In the United States, for example, the average S&P 500 CEO is paid 354 times what the lowest-ranking employee makes, for a ratio of 354:1 (eight times great- er than in the 1950s). Yet, U.S. participants in the study estimated that the ratio between CEOs and unskilled workers was only 30:1! Americans are not alone in mak- ing this gross underestimate: Participants from Germany, for instance, estimated a ratio of around 18:1 when the actual is closer to 151:1.

In general, people worldwide are unhappy with—and demotivated by—their perception of inequity, even when their estimates of the ratios are far below the reality. Tak- ing the German example further, the ideal ratio of CEO pay to unskilled workers as judged by study participants was around 7:1. To put it all together, then, people think the ratio should be 7:1, believe it is 18:1, and don’t real- ize it is actually 151:1. For all the countries worldwide in the study, the estimated ratios were above the ideal ratios, meaning participants universally thought CEOs are overpaid.

How does this affect the average worker’s motivation? It appears that the less a person earns, the less satisfied the person is with the pay gap. Yet virtually everyone in the study wanted greater equality. The ideal ratio, they indicat- ed, should be between 5:1 and 4:1, whereas they thought it was between 10:1 and 8:1. They believed skilled employees should earn more money than unskilled individuals, but that the gap between them should be smaller.

No one in the United States would likely think the 354:1 ratio is going to dip to the ideal of 7:1 soon, although some changes in that direction have been suggested. Other countries have tried to be more progressive. The Social Democratic Party in Switzerland proposed a ceiling for the ratio of 12:1, but putting a cap into law was considered too extreme by voters. No countries have yet been able to suc- cessfully impose a maximum ratio.

Therefore, the job of restoring justice percep- tions has fallen to CEOs themselves. Many CEOs, such as Mark  Zuckerberg of Facebook and Larry Page of Google, have taken $1 annual salaries, though they still earn substantial compensation by exercising their stock options. In one extreme recent example, Gravity CEO Dan Price cut his salary by $1 million to $70,000, using the money to give significant raises to the pay- ment processing firm’s employees. Price said he expects to “see more of this.” In addition, shareholders of some companies, such as Verizon, are playing a greater role in setting CEO compensation by reducing awards when the company underperforms.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 237

Questions 7-13. What do you think is the ideal ratio? Why might

the ideal vary from country to country? 7-14. How does the executive compensation issue relate

to equity theory? How should we determine what is a “fair” level of pay for top executives?

7-15. The study found that participants thought performance should be essential or very important in deciding pay. What might be the positive motiva- tional consequences for average employees if CEO pay is tied to performance?

Sources: J. Ewing, “Swiss Voters Decisively Reject a Measure to Put Limits on Executive Pay,” The New York Times, November 24, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/25/business/swiss-reject- measure-to-curb-executive-pay.html?_r=0; C. Isidore, “Gravity Payments CEO Takes 90% Pay Cut to Give Workers Huge Raise,” CNN Money, April 15, 2015, http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/14/news/ companies/ceo-pay-cuts-pay-increases/; S. Kiatpongsan and M. I. Norton, “How Much (More) Should CEOs Make? A Universal Desire for More Equal Pay,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 6 (2014): 587–93; A. Kleinman, “Mark Zuckerberg $1 Salary Puts Him in Elite Group of $1 CEOs,” The Huffing- ton Post, April 29, 2013, www.huffingtonpost.com; and G. Morgenson, “If Shareholders Say ‘Enough Already,’ the Board May Listen,” The New York Times, April 6, 2013, www.newyorktimes.com.

case inciDent 2 The Sleepiness Epidemic Ronit Rogosziniski, a financial planner, loses sleep because of her 5 a.m. wake-up call, so she sneaks to her car for a quick lunchtime snooze each day. She is not alone, as evi- denced by the comments on Wall Street Oasis, a website frequented by investment bankers who blog about their travails. Should the legions of secret nappers be blessed or cursed by their organizations for this behavior? Research suggests they should be encouraged.

Sleep is a problem, or rather, lack of quality zzz’s is a costly organizational problem we can no longer overlook. Sleepiness, a technical term in this case that denotes a true physiological pressure for sleep, lowers performance and increases accidents, injuries, and unethical behavior. One survey found that 29 percent of respondents slept on the job, 12 percent were late to work, 4 percent left work early, and 2 percent did not go to work due to sleepiness. While sleepiness affects 33 percent of the U.S. population, the clinical extreme, excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS), is fully debilitating to an additional 11 percent.

In a vicious cycle where the effects of sleepiness affect the organization, which leads to longer work hours and thus more sleepiness, the reason for the sleepiness epi- demic seems to be the modern workplace. Full-time em- ployees have been getting less sleep over the past 30 years as a direct result of longer work days, putting them more at risk for sleep disorders. Sleepiness directly decreases at- tention span, memory, information processing, affect, and emotion regulation capabilities. Research on sleep depriva- tion has found that tired workers experience higher levels of back pain, heart disease, depression, work withdrawal, and job dissatisfaction. All these outcomes have significant implications for organizational effectiveness and costs.

Sleepiness may account for $14 billion of medical expens- es, up to $69 billion for auto accidents, and up to $24 bil- lion in workplace accidents in the United States annually.

Although being around bright light and loud sounds, standing, eating, and practicing good posture can reduce sleepiness temporarily, there is only one lasting cure: more hours of good-quality sleep. Some companies are encour- aging napping at work as a solution to the problem, and one survey of 600 companies revealed that 6 percent had dedicated nap rooms. In addition, in a poll of 1,508 workers conducted by the National Sleep Foundation, 34 percent said they were allowed to nap at work. These policies may be a good start, but they are only Band-Aid approaches since more and better sleep is what’s needed. Researchers suggest that organizations should consider flexible working hours and greater autonomy to allow employees to maximize their productive waking hours. Given the high costs of sleepiness, it’s time for them to take the problem much more seriously.

Questions 7-16. Should organizations be concerned about the

sleepiness of their employees? What factors in- fluencing sleep might be more or less under the control of an organization?

7-17. How might sleep deprivation demonstrate aspects of expectancy theory? How might the incorpora- tion of “nap rooms” for sleep-deprived employees demonstrate aspects of equity theory?

7-18. If you were a manager who noticed your employees were sleep-deprived, what steps might you take to help them? What theories of motivation could you use to help them?

238 PART 2 The Individual

Sources: C. Delo, “Why Companies Are Cozying up to Napping at Work,” CNN, August 18, 2011, www .management.fortune.cnn.com; H. M. Mullins, J. M. Cortina, C. L. Drake, and R. S. Dalal, “Sleepi- ness at Work: A Review and Framework of How the Physiology of Sleepiness Impacts the Work- place,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 6 (2014): 1096–112; and D. Wescott, “Do Not Disturb,” Bloomberg Businessweek, April 23–29, 2012, 90.

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

7-19. In regard to the Ethical Dilemma, do you believe your school has experienced grade inflation? Do you think schools like yours should endeavor to curtail grade inflation? What are the pros and cons for you as a student?

7-20. In considering Case Incident 1, do you think the government has a legitimate role in controlling executive compensation? How might aspects of justice (distributive, procedural, and informational) inform this debate?

7-21. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

enDnOtes 1See, for example, G. P. Latham and C. C. Pinder, “Work Motivation Theory and Research at the Dawn of the Twenty-First Century,” Annual Review of Psychology 56 (2005): 485–516; and C. C. Pinder, Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior, 2nd ed. (London, UK: Psychology Press, 2008). 2“The 2013 Wasting Time at Work Survey: Everything You’ve Always Wanted to Know about Wasting Time in the Office,” Salary. com, 2013, www.salary.com. 3See, for instance, Pinder, Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. 4R. J. Taormina and J. H. Gao, “Maslow and the Motivation Hierarchy: Measuring Satisfac- tion of the Needs,” American Journal of Psychol- ogy 126, no. 2 (2013): 155–57. 5H. Skelsey, “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs— The Sixth Level,” Psychologist (2014): 982–83. 6Ibid. 7S. H. Mousavi and H. Dargahi, “Ethnic Dif- ferences and Motivation Based on Maslow’s Theory on Iranian Employees,” Iranian Journal of Public Health 42, no. 5 (2013): 516–21. 8D. Lester, “Measuring Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs,” Psychological Reports 113, no. 1 (2013): 127–29. 9J.-K. Lee and J.-G. Choi, “Testing the Appli- cability of the Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory to the Hotel Industry,” Korean Journal of Business Administration (2012): 2091–111. 10See, for instance, C.-S. Park and K.-S. Ko, “A Study on Factors of Job Satisfaction of Caregiv- ers in Home Care Facilities Based on Herz- berg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory,” Church Social Work (2012): 123–58; and “Study on the Important Factors for Non-Commissioned Of- ficer’s Job Satisfaction in R.O.K. Army Based on Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory,” Journal of

Korean Public Police and Security Studies (2012): 217–38. 11H. van Emmerick, W. L. Gardner, H. Wendt, et al., “Associations of Culture and Personality with McClelland’s Motives: A Cross-Cultural Study of Managers in 24 Countries,” Group and Organization Management 35, no. 3 (2010): 329–67. 12D. G. Winter, “The Motivational Dimen- sions of Leadership: Power, Achievement, and Affiliation,” in R. E. Riggio, S. E. Murphy, and F. J. Pirozzolo (eds.), Multiple Intelligences and Leadership (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2002), 119–38. 13H. van Emmerick, W. L. Gardner, H. Wendt, et al., “Associations of Culture and Personality with McClelland’s Motives: A Cross-Cultural Study of Managers in 24 Countries.” 14See, for instance, “F. Yang, J. E. Ramsay, O. C. Schultheiss, and J. S. Pang, “Need for Achievement Moderates the Effect of Motive- Relevant Challenge on Salivary Cortisol Changes,” Motivation and Emotion (2015): 321–34; M. S. Khan, R. J. Breitnecker, and E. J. Schwarz, “Adding Fuel to the Fire: Need for Achievement Diversity and Relationship Conflict in Entrepreneurial Teams,” Manage- ment Decision 53, no. 1 (2015): 75–79; M. G. Koellner and O. C. Schultheiss, “Meta-Analytic Evidence of Low Convergence between Implicit and Explicit Measures of the Needs for Achievement, Affiliation, and Power,” Frontiers in Psychology 5 (2014): article 826; and T. Bipp and K. van Dam, “Extend- ing Hierarchical Achievement Motivation Models: The Role of Motivational Needs for Achievement Goals and Academic Perfor- mance,” Personality and Individual Differences 64 (2014): 157–62.

15M. G. Koellner and O. C. Schultheiss, “Meta-Analytic Evidence of Low Convergence between Implicit and Explicit Measures of the Needs for Achievement, Affiliation, and Power.” 16J. Hofer, H. Busch, and C. Schneider, “The Effect of Motive-Trait Interaction on Satisfac- tion of the Implicit Need for Affiliation among German and Cameroonian Adults,” Journal of Personality 83, no. 2 (2015): 167–78. 17E. Deci and R. Ryan (eds.), Handbook of Self-Determination Research (Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press, 2002); R. Ryan and E. Deci, “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being,” American Psychologist 55, no. 1 (2000): 68–78; and M. Gagné and E. L. Deci, “Self-Determination Theory and Work Motivation,” Journal of Orga- nizational Behavior 26, no. 4 (2005): 331–62. 18C. P. Cerasoli, J. M. Nicklin, and M. T. Ford, “Intrinsic Motivation and Extrinsic Incen- tives Jointly Predict Performance: A 40-Year Meta-Analysis,” Psychological Bulletin 140, no. 4 (2014): 980–1008. 19J. E. Bono and T. A. Judge, “Self-Concor- dance at Work: Toward Understanding the Motivational Effects of Transformational Lead- ers,” Academy of Management Journal 46, no. 5 (2003): 554–71. 20K. M. Sheldon, A. J. Elliot, and R. M. Ryan, “Self-Concordance and Subjective Well-being in Four Cultures,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35, no. 2 (2004): 209–23. 21L. M. Graves, M. N. Ruderman, P. J. Ohlott, and Todd J. Webber, “Driven to Work and Enjoyment of Work: Effects on Managers’ Outcomes,” Journal of Management 38, no. 5 (2012): 1655–80.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 239

22K. M. Sheldon, A. J. Elliot, and R. M. Ryan, “Self-Concordance and Subjective Well-Being in Four Cultures,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 35, no. 2 (2004): 209–23. 23J. P. Meyer, T. E. Becker, and C. Vandenber- ghe, “Employee Commitment and Motivation: A Conceptual Analysis and Integrative Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 6 (2004): 991–1007. 24E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham, “New Direc- tions in Goal-Setting Theory,” Current Direc- tions in Psychological Science 15, no. 5 (2006): 265–68. 25Ibid. 26C. Gabelica, P. Van den Bossche, M. Segers, and W. Gijselaersa, “Feedback, a Powerful Le- ver in Teams: A Review,” Educational Research Review (June 2012): 123–44. 27J. Lee and F. Wei, “The Mediating Effect of Psychological Empowerment on the Relation- ship between Participative Goal Setting and Team Outcomes—A Study in China,” Interna- tional Journal of Human Resource Management 22, no. 2 (2011): 279–95. 28S. W. Anderson, H. C. Dekker, and K. L. Sedatole, “An Empirical Examination of Goals and Performance-to-Goal Following the Introduction of an Incentive Bonus Plan with Participative Goal Setting,” Management Science 56, no. 1 (2010): 90–109. 29T. S. Bateman and B. Bruce, “Masters of the Long Haul: Pursuing Long-Term Work Goals,” Journal of Organizational Behavior (October 2012): 984–1006. 30Ibid. 31J. E. Bono and A. E. Colbert, “Understanding Responses to Multi-Source Feedback: The Role of Core Self-Evaluations,” Personnel Psychology 58, no. 1 (2005): 171–203; and S. A. Jeffrey, A. Schulz, and A. Webb, “The Performance Effects of an Ability-Based Approach to Goal Assignment,” Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 32 (2012): 221–41. 32T. Tammemagi, D. O’Hora, and K. A. Maglieri, “The Effects of a Goal Setting Intervention on Productivity and Persis- tence in an Analogue Work Task,” Journal of Organizational Behavior Management (March 1, 2013): 31–54. 33K. D. Vohs, J. K. Park, and B. J. Schmeichel, “Self-Affirmation Can Enable Goal Disengage- ment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy 104, no. 1 (2013): 14–27. 34D. F. Crown, “The Use of Group and Group- centric Individual Goals for Culturally Hetero- geneous and Homogeneous Task Groups: An Assessment of European Work Teams,” Small Group Research 38, no. 4 (2007): 489–508; and J. Kurman, “Self-Regulation Strategies in Achievement Settings: Culture and Gender Differences,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 32, no. 4 (2001): 491–503. 35C. Sue-Chan and M. Ong, “Goal Assignment and Performance: Assessing the Mediating Roles of Goal Commitment and Self-Efficacy and the Moderating Role of Power Distance,”

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 89, no. 2 (2002): 1140–61. 36L. D. Ordóñez, M. E. Schweitzer, A. D. Galinsky, and M. H. Bazerman, “Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Overpre- scribing Goal Setting,” Academy of Management Perspectives 23, no. 1 (2009): 6–16; and E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham, “Has Goal Setting Gone Wild, or Have Its Attackers Abandoned Good Scholarship?” Academy of Management Perspectives 23, no. 1 (2009): 17–23. 37C. P. Cerasoli, J. M. Nicklin, and M. T. Ford, “Intrinsic Motivation and Extrinsic Incentives Jointly Predict Performance: A 40-Year Meta- Analysis.” 38K. Lanaj, C. D. Chang, and R. E. Johnson, “Regulatory Focus and Work-Related Out- comes: A Review and Meta-Analysis,” Psycho- logical Bulletin 138, no. 5 (2012): 998–1034. 39D. L. Ferris, R. E. Johnson, C. C. Rosen, E. Djurdjevic, C.-H. Chang, and J. A. Tan, “When Is Success Not Satisfying? Integrating Regulatory Focus and Approach/Avoidance Motivation Theories to Explain the Relation between Core Self-Evaluation and Job Satisfac- tion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98, no. 2 (2013): 342–53. 40M. Roskes, A. J. Elliot, and C. K. W. De Dreu, “Why Is Avoidance Motivation Problematic, and What Can Be Done about It?” Current Di- rections in Psychological Science 23, no. 2 (2014): 133–38. 41“KEYGroup Survey Finds Nearly Half of All Employees Have No Set Performance Goals,” IPMA-HR Bulletin (March 10, 2006): 1; S. Hamm, “SAP Dangles a Big, Fat Carrot,” BusinessWeek (May 22, 2006): 67–68; and “P&G CEO Wields High Expectations but No Whip,” USA Today, February 19, 2007, 3B. 42See, for instance, F. Ceresia, “A Model of Goal Dynamics in Organizations: Goal Setting, Goal Commitment, Training, and Management by Objectives,” Proceedings of 2009 Conference on Systems Science, Management Science & System Dynamics 1 (2009): 37–46; and H. Levinson, “Management by Whose Objectives?” Harvard Business Review 81, no. 1 (2003): 107–16. 43See, for example, E. Lindberg and T. L. Wil- son, “Management by Objectives: The Swedish Experience in Upper Secondary Schools,” Journal of Educational Administration 49, no. 1 (2011): 62–75; and A. C. Spaulding, L. D. Gamm, and J. M. Griffith, “Studer Unplugged: Identifying Underlying Managerial Concepts,” Hospital Topics 88, no. 1 (2010): 1–9. 44M. B. Kristiansen, “Management by Objec- tives and Results in the Nordic Countries: Continuity and Change, Differences and Similarities,” Public Performance and Manage- ment Review 38, no. 3 (2015): 542–69. 45See, for instance, M. Tanikawa, “Fujitsu Decides to Backtrack on Performance-Based Pay,” New York Times, March 22, 2001, W1; and W. F. Roth, “Is Management by Objectives Obsolete?” Global Business and Organizational Excellence 28 (May/June 2009): 36–43.

46F. Gino and C. Mogilner, “Time, Money, and Morality,” Psychological Science 25, no. 2 (2014): 414–21. 47V. Lopez-Kidwell, T. J. Grosser, B. R. Dineen, and S. P. Borgatti, “What Matters When: A Multistage Model and Empirical Examination of Job Search Effort,” Academy of Management Journal 56, no. 6 (2012): 1655–78. 48J. W. Beck and A. M. Schmidt, “State- Level Goal Orientations as Mediators of the Relationship between Time Pressure and Performance: A Longitudinal Study,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98, no. 2 (2013): 354–63. 49J. R. Themanson and P. J. Rosen, “Examin- ing the Relationships between Self-Efficacy, Task-Relevant Attentional Control, and Task Performance: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials,” British Journal of Psychology 106, no. 2 (2015): 253–71. 50A. Bandura, “Cultivate Self-Efficacy for Personal and Organizational Effectiveness,” in E. Locke (ed.), Handbook of Principles of Or- ganizational Behavior (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004), 120–36; and M. Ventura, M. Salanova, and S. Llorens, “Professional Self-Efficacy as a Predictor of Burnout and Engagement: The Role of Challenge and Hindrance Demands,” Journal of Psychology 149, no. 3 (2015): 277–302. 51M. Salanova, S. Llorens, and W. B. Schaufeli, “Yes I Can, I Feel Good, and I Just Do It! On Gain Cycles and Spirals of Efficacy Beliefs, Af- fect, and Engagement,” Applied Psychology 60, no. 2 (2011): 255–85. 52J. R. Themanson and P. J. Rosen, “Examin- ing the Relationships between Self-Efficacy, Task-Relevant Attentional Control, and Task Performance: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials.” 53A. P. Tolli and A. M. Schmidt, “The Role of Feedback, Causal Attributions, and Self- Efficacy in Goal Revision,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 3 (2008): 692–701. 54P. Tierney and S. M. Farmer, “Creative Self-Efficacy Development and Creative Performance Over Time,” Journal of Applied Psychology 96, no. 2 (2011): 277–93. 55S. L. Anderson and N. E. Betz, “Sources of Social Self-Efficacy Expectations: Their Measurement and Relation to Career Devel- opment,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 58, no. 1 (2001): 98–117; M. Ben-Ami, J. Hornik, D. Eden, et al., “Boosting Consumers’ Self- Efficacy by Repositioning the Self,” European Journal of Marketing 48 (2014): 1914–38; L. De Grez and D. Van Lindt, “Students’ Gains in Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy: A Compari- son of ‘Learning-by-Doing’ versus Lecture- Based Courses,” Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneur- ship (2013): 198–203; and K. S. Hendricks, “Changes in Self-Efficacy Beliefs over Time: Contextual Influences of Gender, Rank-Based Placement, and Social Support in a Competi- tive Orchestra Environment,” Psychology of Music 42, no. 3 (2014): 347–65.

240 PART 2 The Individual

56T. A. Judge, C. L. Jackson, J. C. Shaw, B. Scott, and B. L. Rich, “Self-Efficacy and Work-Related Performance: The Integral Role of Individual Differences,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 107–27. 57Ibid. 58A. M. Paul, “How to Use the ‘Pygmalion’ Effect,” Time, April 1, 2013, http://ideas.time .com/2013/04/01/how-to-use-the-pygmalion- effect/. 59A. Friedrich, B. Flunger, B. Nagengast, K. Jonkmann, and U. Trautwein, “Pygmalion Effects in the Classroom: Teacher Expectancy Effects on Students’ Math Achievement,” Contemporary Educational Psychology 41 (2015): 1–12. 60L. Karakowsky, N. DeGama, and K. McBey, “Facilitating the Pygmalion Effect: The Over- looked Role of Subordinate Perceptions of the Leader,” Journal of Occupational and Organiza- tional Psychology 85, no. 4 (2012): 579–99; and P. Whiteley, T. Sy, and S. K. Johnson, “Leaders’ Conceptions of Followers: Implications for Naturally Occurring Pygmalion Effects,” Lead- ership Quarterly 23, no. 5 (2012): 822–34. 61A. Gegenfurtner, C. Quesada-Pallares, and M. Knogler, “Digital Simulation-Based Train- ing: A Meta-Analysis,” British Journal of Educa- tional Technology 45, no. 6 (2014): 1097–114. 62E. C. Dierdorff, E. A. Surface, and K. G. Brown, “Frame-of-Reference Training Effectiveness: Effects of Goal Orientation and Self-Efficacy on Affective, Cognitive, Skill- Based, and Transfer Outcomes,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 6 (2010): 1181–91; and R. Grossman and E. Salas, “The Transfer of Training: What Really Matters,” Internation- al Journal of Training and Development 15, no. 2 (2011): 103–20. 63K. M. Eddington, C. Majestic, and P. J. Silvia, “Contrasting Regulatory Focus and Reinforce- ment Sensitivity: A Daily Diary Study of Goal Pursuit and Emotion,” Personality and Indi- vidual Differences (August 2012): 335–40. 64X. Zhu and M. Tian, “On the Incentive System for Chinese Local Governments’ Work of Environmental Protection from the Per- spective of Skinner’s Reinforcement Theory,” Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Public Administration (2013): 271–77. 65M. J. Goddard, “Critical Psychiatry, Critical Psychology, and the Behaviorism of B. F. Skinner,” Review of General Psychology 18, no. 3 (2014): 208–15. 66J. R. Brauer and C. R. Tittle, “Social Learn- ing Theory and Human Reinforcement,” Sociological Spectrum 32, no. 2 (2012): 157–77. 67C. Buzea, “Equity Theory Constructs in a Romanian Cultural Context,” Human Resource Development Quarterly 25, no. 4 (2014): 421–39; A. W. Cappelen, T. Eichele, K. Hugdahl, K. Specht, and B. Tungodden, “Equity Theory and Fair Inequality: A Neuroeconomic Study,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences in the United States of America 111(2014): 15368–72; C. Maslach and M. P. Leiter, “Early

Predictors of Job Burnout and Engagement, Journal of Applied Psychology (May 2008): 498–512; and Q. Xiaoqing, K. Zhang, and Y. Xu, “Applicable Scope of Equity Theory and Reaction on Productivity under the Influence of Traditional Culture,” 2014 2nd International Conference on Social Science and Health, Pt. 3 in Advances in Education Research 57 (2014): 365–69. 68J. Bai, “Analysis of Equity Theory in the Modern Enterprise Staff Motivation,” Pro- ceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Management Innovation and Public Policy (2012): 165–67; C. Buzea, “Equity Theory Constructs in a Romanian Cultural Context,” Human Resource Development Quarterly 25, no. 4 (2014): 421–39; R. W. Griffeth and S. Gaertner, “A Role for Equity Theory in the Turnover Process: An Empirical Test,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 31, no. 5 (2001): 1017–37; and L. K. Scheer, N. Kumar, and J.-B. E. M. Steenkamp, “Reactions to Perceived Inequity in U.S. and Dutch Interorganiza- tional Relationships,” Academy of Management 46, no. 3 (2003): 303–16. 69B. K. Miller, “Entitlement and Conscien- tiousness in the Prediction of Organizational Deviance,” Personality and Individual Differences 82 (2015): 114–19; and H. J. R. Woodley and N. J. Allen, “The Dark Side of Equity Sensitiv- ity,” Personality and Individual Differences 67 (2014): 103–08. 70J. M. Jensen, P. C. Patel, and J. L. Raver, “Is It Better to Be Average? High and Low Perfor- mance as Predictors of Employee Victimiza- tion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 2 (2014): 296–309. 71See, for instance, J. A. Colquitt, D. E. Con- lon, M. J. Wesson, C. O. L. H. Porter, and K.-Y. Ng, “Justice at the Millennium: A Meta-Ana- lytic Review of the 25 Years of Organizational Justice Research,” Journal of Applied Psychology 86, no. 3 (2001): 425–45; T. Simons and Q. Roberson, “Why Managers Should Care about Fairness: The Effects of Aggregate Justice Perceptions on Organizational Outcomes,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 3 (2003): 432–43; and B. C. Holtz and C. M. Harold, “Fair Today, Fair Tomorrow? A Longitudinal Investigation of Overall Justice Perceptions,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 5 (2009): 1185–99. 72C. O. Trevor, G. Reilly, and B. Gerhart, “Reconsidering Pay Dispersion’s Effect on the Performance of Interdependent Work: Recon- ciling Sorting and Pay Inequality,” Academy of Management Journal (June 2012): 585–610. 73See, for example, R. Cropanzano, J. H. Stein, and T. Nadisic, Social Justice and the Expe- rience of Emotion (New York: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group, 2011). 74A. Caza, M. W. McCarter, and G. B. North- craft, “Performance Benefits of Reward Choice: A Procedural Justice Perspective,” Human Resource Management Journal 25, no. 2 (2015): 184–99; R. E. Johnson, K. Lanaj, and

C. M. Barnes, “The Good and Bad of Being Fair: Effects of Procedural and Interpersonal Justice Behaviors on Regulatory Resources,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 4 (2014): 635–50; and D. Liu, M. Hernandez, and L. Wang, “The Role of Leadership and Trust in Creating Structural Patterns of Team Proce- dural Justice: A Social Network Investigation,” Personnel Psychology 67, no. 4 (2014): 801–45. 75H. He, W. Zhu, and X. Zheng, “Procedural Justice and Employee Engagement: Roles of Organizational Identification and Moral Identity Centrality,” Journal of Business Ethics 122, no. 4 (2014): 681–95. 76J. C. Shaw, E. Wild, and J. A. Colquitt, “To Justify or Excuse? A Meta-Analytic Review of the Effects of Explanations,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 3 (2003): 444–58. 77R. J. Bies, “Are Procedural and Interactional Justice Conceptually Distinct?” in J. Greenberg and J. A. Colquitt (eds.), Handbook of Organi- zational Justice (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2005), 85–112; and B. A. Scott, J. A. Colquitt, and E. L. Paddock, “An Actor-Focused Model of Jus- tice Rule Adherence and Violation: The Role of Managerial Motives and Discretion,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 3 (2009): 756–69. 78G. A. Van Kleef, A. C. Homan, B. Beer- sma, D. V. Knippenberg, B. V. Knippenberg, and F. Damen, “Searing Sentiment or Cold Calculation? The Effects of Leader Emotional Displays on Team Performance Depend on Follower Epistemic Motivation,” Academy of Management Journal 52, no. 3 (2009): 562–80. 79“Rutgers Fires Mike Rice,” ESPN, 2013, http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/post/_/ id/9129245/rutgers-fires-mike-rice 80J. M. Robbins, M. T. Ford, and L. E. Tetrick, “Perceived Unfairness and Employee Health: A Meta-Analytic Integration,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 2 (2012): 235–72. 81J. A. Colquitt, B. A. Scott, J. B. Rodell, D. M. Long, C. P. Zapata, D. E. Conlon, and M. J. Wesson, “Justice at the Millennium, A Decade Later: A Meta-Analytic Test of Social Exchange and Affect-Based Perspectives,” Journal of Ap- plied Psychology 98, no. 2 (2013): 199–236. 82K. Leung, K. Tong, and S. S. Ho, “Effects of Interactional Justice on Egocentric Bias in Resource Allocation Decisions,” Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 3 (2004): 405–15; and L. Francis-Gladney, N. R. Manger, and R. B. Welker, “Does Outcome Favorability Affect Procedural Fairness as a Result of Self- Serving Attributions,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 40, no. 1 (2010): 182–94. 83L. J. Barlcay and D. P. Skarlicki, “Healing the Wounds of Organizational Injustice: Examin- ing the Benefits of Expressive Writing,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 2 (2009): 511–23. 84This section is based on B. A. Scott, A. S. Garza, D. E. Conlon, and Y. J. Kim, “Why Do Managers Act Fairly in the First Place? A Daily Investigation of ‘Hot’ and ‘Cold’ Motives and Discretion,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 6 (2014): 1571–91.

Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 241

85F. F. T. Chiang and T. Birtch, “The Transfer- ability of Management Practices: Examining Cross-National Differences in Reward Prefer- ences,” Human Relations 60, no. 9 (2007): 1293–330; and M. J. Gelfand, M. Erez, and Z. Aycan, “Cross-Cultural Organizational Behavior,” Annual Review of Psychology 58 (2007): 479–514. 86M. C. Bolino and W. H. Turnley, “Old Faces, New Places: Equity Theory in Cross-Cultural Contexts,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 29, no. 1 (2008): 29–50. 87R. Shao, D. E. Rupp, D. P. Skarlicki, and K. S. Jones, “Employee Justice across Cultures: A Meta-Analytic Review,” Journal of Manage- ment 39, no. 1 (2013): 263–301. 88R. L. Purvis, T. J. Zagenczyck, and G. E. Mc- Cray, “What’s in It for Me? Using Expectancy Theory and Climate to Explain Stakeholder Participation, Its Direction and Intensity,” International Journal of Project Management 33, no. 1 (2015): 3–14. 89M. Renko, K. G. Koeck, and A. Bullough, “Expectancy Theory and Nascent Entrepre- neurship,” Small Business Economics 39, no. 3 (2012): 667–84; J. J. Donovan, “Work Motiva- tion,” in N. Anderson et al. (eds.), Handbook of Industrial, Work & Organizational Psychology, vol. 2 (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001), 56–59; and G. Yu and J. Guo, “Research on Employee Motivation Mechanism in Modern Enterprises Based on Victor H. Vroom’s Ex- pectancy Theory,” in G. Duysters, A. DeHoyos, and K. Kaminishi (eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Innovation and Management (2012): 988–91.

90Vroom refers to these three variables as expectancy, instrumentality, and valence, respectively. 91J. Nocera, “The Anguish of Being an Analyst,” The New York Times, March 4, 2006, B1, B12. 92H.-T. Chang, H.-M. Hsu, J.-W. Liou, and C.-T. Tsai, “Psychological Contracts and Inno- vative Behavior: A Moderated Path Analysis of Work Engagement and Job Resources,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 43, no. 10 (2013): 2021–135. 93See topics of employee engagement from Gallup on http://www.gallup.com/topic/ employee_engagement.aspx, accessed May 28, 2015. 94M. S. Christian, A. S. Garza, and J. E. Slaughter, “Work Engagement: A Quantitative Review and Test of Its Relations with Task and Contextual Performance,” Personnel Psychology 64, no. 1 (2011): 89–136. 95W. B. Schaufeli, A. B. Bakker, and W. van Rhenen, “How Changes in Job Demands and Resources Predict Burnout, Work Engage- ment, and Sickness Absenteeism,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 30, no. 7 (2009): 893–917; E. R. Crawford, J. A. LePine, and B. L. Rich, “Linking Job Demands and Resources to Employee Engagement and Burnout: A Theoretical Extension and Meta- Analytic Test,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 5 (2010): 834–48; and D. Xanthopou- lou, A. B. Bakker, E. Demerouti, and W. B. Schaufeli, “Reciprocal Relationships between Job Resources, Personal Resources, and Work Engagement,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 74, no. 3 (2009): 235–44.

96B. L. Rich, J. A. LePine, and E. R. Crawford, “Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effects on Job Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 53, no. 3 (2010): 617–35. 97M. Tims, A. B. Bakker, and D. Xanthopou- lou, “Do Transformational Leaders Enhance Their Followers’ Daily Work Engagement?” Leadership Quarterly 22, no. 1 (2011): 121–31; and F. O. Walumbwa, P. Wang, H. Wang, J. Schaubroeck, and B. J. Avolio, “Psychological Processes Linking Authentic Leadership to Follower Behaviors,” Leadership Quarterly 21, no. 5 (2010): 901–14. 98D. A. Newman and D. A. Harrison, “Been There, Bottled That: Are State and Behavioral Work Engagement New and Useful Construct ‘Wines?’” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 1, no. 1 (2008): 31–35; and A. J. Wefald and R. G. Downey, “Job Engagement in Organizations: Fad, Fashion, or Folderol,” Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior 30, no. 1 (2009): 141–45. 99See, for example, Rich, LePine, and Craw- ford, “Job Engagement: Antecedents and Effects on Job Performance;” and Christian, Garza, and Slaughter, “Work Engagement: A Quantitative Review and Test of Its Relations with Task and Contextual Performance.” 100J. M. George, “The Wider Context, Costs, and Benefits of Work Engagement,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 20, no. 1 (2011): 53–59; and J. R. B. Halbesleben, J. Harvey, and M. C. Bolino, “Too Engaged? A Conservation of Resources View of the Rela- tionship between Work Engagement and Work Interference with Family,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 6 (2009): 1452–65.

S ou

rc e:

B ru

ce A

ck er

m an

/O ca

la S

ta r-B

an ne

r/ La

nd ov

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications

8

242

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 243

Motivated to Risk it all

These days, Lee Farkas (seen here) is wearing the same outfit in ev-ery picture: a heavy cloth shirt with the bold orange stripes of a U.S. federal penitentiary. But it wasn’t long ago that Farkas wore

the expensive suits of a successful mortgage banker and

posed with his private jet. “It’s not a crime to have a plane,”

he said. True, unless you buy the plane using $38.5 million of

personally misappropriated funds. Farkas and six others are

responsible for a $2.9 billion fraud that collapsed two banks and created the sixth-largest U.S. bank failure ever. He is the

most senior executive incarcerated as a result of the housing

bubble  debacle and, with his group of co-conspirators, owes

$3.5 billion in restitution. Farkas is currently serving 30 years

in the same prison as the infamous Bernie Madoff, who is

serving a life term for bank fraud.

The motives for Farkas’s crimes defy logic. By all accounts,

he had the intelligence and savvy to live an honest rags- to-riches story: originally broke and with no experience in

finance, he bought Taylor, Bean & Whitaker (TBW), a small mortgage firm,

with $75,000 (he says it was $25,000) in borrowed funds and within a

decade transformed it into one of the top mortgage lenders. Somehow this

success wasn’t enough for him, though, so he created and sold phony mort-

gages, siphoning the gains into his private accounts to fund a lavish lifestyle

8-1 Describe how the job characteristics model motivates by changing the work environment.

8-2 Compare the main ways jobs can be redesigned.

8-3 Explain how specific alternative work arrangements can motivate employees.

8-4 Describe how employee involvement measures can motivate employees.

8-5 Demonstrate how the different types of variable-pay programs can increase employee motivation.

8-6 Show how flexible benefits turn benefits into motivators.

8-7 Identify the motivational benefits of intrinsic rewards.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

244 PART 2 The Individual

including houses, cars, and planes. When TBW accumulated a huge deficit

as a result, Farkas enlisted Colonial Bank’s Senior VP Catherine Kissick to

help sell loans concurrently to multiple hedge funds and push the phony

proceeds back into TBW’s accounts. Soon both firms collapsed.

Why wasn’t Farkas motivated to continue his earlier honest success?

He seems to have felt he simply wasn’t making enough money. “I wasn’t

the kind of guy they painted a picture of, big high-living,” he said. “Among my peer group, I was a pauper.” Farkas also felt entitled to the money he

stole, for while he admits he did “things that were not really smart,” he

maintains his innocence. Farkas furthermore minimizes his role, saying it

is “important to understand that I was a small-town businessman . . . with

no political connections or power.” Finally, he refuses to accept responsi-

bility. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema, who presided over the resti-

tution ruling, commented that Farkas showed no remorse beyond sorrow

over “getting caught.” Indeed, Farkas said he was disbelieving when he

was arrested. “I go ‘ha ha, get away,’” he said. “Finally, they took these guns out.”

For the love of money, Farkas was willing to risk it all—even freedom for

the rest of his life. If he fails to have his sentence overturned, he will not

be released until he is in his 80s. Farkas feels he already lives only “vicari-

ously” through e-mail contact with family and friends. “You’re not really alive

in here, you’re a zombie—just a body walking around, eating, sleeping and

being yelled at,” he complained. His motive for living now is to get out. His last conviction appeal failed, and if the next one fails too, he says, “Maybe

I’ll just fade away.”

Sources: L. B. Farkas, “Lee B. Farkas Story,” US vs Lee B. Farkas, www.leefarkas.com; P. Fitzgerald, “Bank of America Paid $315 to Settle with Banks over Ocala Losses,” The Wall Street Journal, May 5, 2015, http://www.wsj.com/articles/bank-of-america-paid-315-million- to-settle-with-banks-over-ocala-losses-1430863619?tesla=y; J. Eaglesham, “A Prison Life: Ex-Banker Struggles,” The Wall Street Journal, March 19, 2014, C1; and A Macias, “Someone You’ve Never Heard of, and He Feels Like a ‘Zombie’ in Prison,” Business Insider, March 20, 2014, http://www.businessinsider.com/ex-mortgage-mogul-lee-farkus-2014-3.

A s we can see in the ongoing saga of Lee Farkas, money can be an extremely powerful motivator. For most individuals, though, pay is not the only motivator. It is a central means of motivation, but what you’re actually doing for the money matters, too. The process of motivating employees is complex, and people feel strongly about the implications of changes to their extrinsic or intrinsic benefits.

In Chapter 7, we focused on motivation theories. While it’s important to understand the underlying concepts, it’s also important to see how you can use them as a manager. In this chapter, we apply motivation concepts to practices, beginning with job design.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 245

Motivating by Job Design: The Job Characteristics Model The way work is structured has a bigger impact on an individual’s motivation than might first appear. Job design suggests that the way elements in a job are organized can influence employee effort, and the job characteristics model, dis- cussed next, can serve as a framework to identify opportunities for changes to those elements.

the Job Characteristics Model Developed by J. Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham, the job characteristics model (JCM) describes jobs in terms of five core job dimensions:1

1. Skill variety is the degree to which a job requires different activities using specialized skills and talents. The work of a garage owner-operator who does electrical repairs, rebuilds engines, does bodywork, and interacts with cus- tomers scores high on skill variety. The job of a body shop worker who sprays paint 8 hours a day scores low on this dimension.

2. Task identity is the degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and identifiable piece of work. A cabinetmaker who designs furniture, selects the wood, builds the objects, and finishes them has a job that scores high on task identity. A job scoring low on this dimension is operating a lathe solely to make table legs.

3. Task significance is the degree to which a job affects the lives or work of other people. The job of a nurse helping patients in a hospital intensive care unit scores high on task significance; sweeping floors in a hospital scores low.

4. Autonomy is the degree to which a job provides the worker freedom, inde- pendence, and discretion in scheduling work and determining the proce- dures for carrying it out. A sales manager who schedules his own work and tailors his sales approach for each customer without supervision has a highly autonomous job. An account representative who is required to follow a stan- dardized sales script with potential customers has a job low on autonomy.

5. Feedback is the degree to which carrying out work activities generates direct and clear information about your own performance. A job with high feed- back is testing and inspecting iPads. Installing components of iPads as they move down an assembly line provides low feedback.

Exhibit 8-1 presents the JCM. Note how the first three dimensions—skill variety, task identity, and task significance—combine to create meaningful work the employee will view as important, valuable, and worthwhile. Jobs with high autonomy give employees a feeling of personal responsibility for results; feed- back will show them how effectively they are performing. The JCM proposes that individuals obtain internal rewards when they learn (knowledge of results in the model) that they personally have performed well (experienced responsi- bility) on a task they care about (experienced meaningfulness). The more these three psychological states are present, the greater will be employees’ motiva- tion, performance, and satisfaction, and the lower their absenteeism and likeli- hood of leaving. As Exhibit 8-1 indicates, individuals with a high growth need are more likely to experience the critical psychological states when their jobs are enriched—and respond to them more positively.

Much evidence supports the JCM concept that the presence of these job characteristics generates higher job satisfaction and organizational commit- ment through increased motivation.2 In general, research concurs with the

8-1 Describe how the job characteristics model motivates by changing the work environment.

job design The way the elements in a job are organized.

job characteristics model (JCM) A model that proposes that any job can be described in terms of five core job dimensions: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback.

skill variety The degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities.

task identity The degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and identifiable piece of work.

task significance The degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other people.

autonomy The degree to which a job provides substantial freedom and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out.

feedback The degree to which carrying out the work activities required by a job results in the individual obtaining direct and clear information about the effectiveness of his or her performance.

246 PART 2 The Individual

theory behind the JCM, although studies have introduced potential modifiers. One study suggested that when employees were “other oriented” (concerned with the welfare of others at work), the relationship between intrinsic job char- acteristics and job satisfaction was weaker,3 meaning that our job satisfaction comes less from these characteristics when we care about others. Another study proposed that the degree of psychological ownership we feel toward our work enhances our motivation, particularly if the feelings of ownership are shared among a work group.4 Other research has explored the JCM in unique set- tings such as in virtual work situations, finding that if individuals work together online but not in person, their experience of meaningfulness, responsibility, and knowledge of results can suffer. Thankfully, managers can mitigate these for employees by consciously developing personal relationships with them and increasing their sense of task significance, autonomy, and feedback.5

We can combine the core dimensions of the JCM into a single predictive index, called the motivating potential score (MPS) and calculated as follows:

MPS = Skill variety + Task identiy + Task Significance * Autonomy * Feedback 3

To be high on motivating potential, jobs must be high on at least one of the three factors that lead to experienced meaningfulness and high on both auton- omy and feedback. If jobs score high on motivating potential, the model pre- dicts that motivation, performance, and satisfaction will improve, while absence and turnover will be reduced. But we can better calculate motivating potential by simply adding characteristics rather than using the formula. Think about your job. Do you have the opportunity to work on different tasks, or is your day routine? Are you able to work independently, or do you constantly have a super- visor or coworker looking over your shoulder? Your answers indicate your job’s motivating potential.

A few studies have tested the JCM in different cultures, but the results aren’t consistent. The fact that the model is relatively individualistic (it considers the relationship between the employee and his or her work) suggests job enrichment

motivating potential score (MPS) A predictive index that suggests the motivating potential in a job.

the Job Characteristics ModelExhibit 8-1

Personal and work outcomes

Skill variety Task identity Task significance

Experienced meaningfulness of the work

High internal work motivation

Autonomy Experienced responsibility for outcomes of the work

High-quality work performance

High satisfaction with the work

Feedback Knowledge of the actual results of the work activities

Low absenteeism and turnover

Skill i t

Core job dimensions

E i d

Critical psychological states

Employee growth- need strength

Source: J. L. Pierce, I. Jussila, and A. Cummings, “Psychological Ownership within the Job Design Context: Revision of the Job Character-

istics Model,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 30, no. 4 (2009): 477–96.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 247

strategies may not have the same effects in collectivistic cultures as in individu- alistic cultures (such as the United States). Indeed, one study in Niger found that while the MPS was highly influenced by job dimensions, the correlations were different than the general data gathered from predominately individualist countries.6 In contrast, another study suggested the degree to which jobs had intrinsic job motivators predicted job satisfaction and job involvement equally well for U.S., Japanese, and Hungarian employees.7

Job Redesign “Every day was the same thing,” Frank said. “Stand on that assembly line. Wait for an instrument panel to be moved into place. Unlock the mechanism and drop the panel into the Jeep Liberty as it moved by on the line. Then I plugged in the harnessing wires. I repeated that for eight hours a day. I don’t care that they were paying me 24 dollars an hour. I was going crazy. Finally, I just said this isn’t going to be the way I’m going to spend the rest of my life. My brain was turning to JELL-O. So I quit. Now I work in a print shop and I make less than 15 dollars an hour. But let me tell you, the work I do is really interesting. The job changes all the time, I’m continually learning new things, and the work really challenges me! I look forward every morning to going to work again.”

The repetitive tasks in Frank’s job at the Jeep plant provided little variety, autonomy, or motivation. In contrast, his job in the print shop is challenging and stimulating. From an organizational perspective, the failure of Frank’s first employer to redesign his job into a more satisfying one led to increased turn- over. Redesigning jobs therefore has important practical implications—reduced turnover and increased job satisfaction among them. Let’s look at some ways to put the JCM into practice to make jobs more motivating.

Job Rotation If employees suffer from over-routinization of their work, one alternative is job rotation, or the periodic shifting of an employee from one task to another with similar skill requirements at the same organizational level (also called cross-training). Manufacturers also use job rotation as needed to respond more flexibly to the volume of incoming orders. New managers are sometimes rotat- ed through jobs, too, to help them get a picture of a whole organization.8 For these reasons, job rotation can be applied in any setting where cross-training is feasible, from manufacturing floors to hospital wards. At Singapore Airlines, for instance, a ticket agent may temporarily take on the duties of a baggage handler, both to be cross-trained and get exposure to different aspects of the organization. Extensive job rotation is among the reasons Singapore Airlines is rated one of the best airlines in the world.9

The use of job rotation has been shown to increase job satisfaction and organizational commitment.10 Additionally, international evidence from Italy, Britain, and Turkey shows that job rotation is associated with higher levels of organizational performance in manufacturing settings.11 It reduces boredom, increases motivation, and helps employees understand how their work con- tributes to the organization. It may also increase safety and reduce repetitive- based work injuries, but this is currently a topic of much study and debate, with mixed findings.12

Job rotation does have drawbacks. Work that is done repeatedly may become habitual and routine, which makes decision making more automatic and effi- cient, but less thoughtfully considered. Second, training costs increase when each rotation necessitates a round of training. Third, moving a worker into

8-2 Compare the main ways jobs can be redesigned.

job rotation The periodic shifting of an employee from one task to another.

248 PART 2 The Individual

a new position reduces overall productivity for that role. Fourth, job rota- tion creates disruptions when members of the work group have to adjust to new employees. Finally, supervisors may have to spend more time answering questions and monitoring the work of recently rotated employees.

Relational Job design While redesigning jobs on the basis of job characteristics theory is likely to make work more intrinsically motivating, research is focusing on how to make jobs more prosocially motivating to people. In other words, how can managers design work so employees are motivated to promote the well-being of the orga- nization’s beneficiaries (customers, clients, patients, and employees)? This view, relational job design, shifts the spotlight from the employee to those whose lives are affected by the job that employee performs.13 It also motivates individuals toward increased job performance.14

One way to make jobs more prosocially motivating is to better connect employees with the beneficiaries of their work by relating stories from customers who have found the company’s products or services to be helpful. For example,

relational job design Constructing jobs so employees see the positive difference they can make in the lives of others directly through their work.

A long with this clichéd state-ment, you’ve probably heard that money does buy happiness. Both may be true. Economist Richard Easterlin argued that once basic finan- cial needs have been met, more money doesn’t really do much to make a per- son happy. Researchers set the limit at around $75,000, recently prompting one CEO to give away all his earnings above that amount to his employees!

This is by no means the last word, nor a directive to be unhappy until you make $75,000 and no happier after- ward. More recent research worldwide indicates the exact opposite: The more money, the better. The authors said, “If there is a satiation point, we are yet to reach it.”

Given these mixed findings, the relationship between happiness and income is probably not direct. In fact, other research suggests your level of income is less important than how you spend it. Think about why you may be motivated by money. Do you envision the number of zeroes in your bank account increasing? Probably not. You’re probably more motivated

by what you can buy with the money than by the money itself. From re- search, we know:

• Giving money away makes people happier than spending it on them- selves. In one study, students were given money and told to either give it away or spend it on themselves. Then the study asked people to give away their own money. Either way, people were happier giving away the money, even if the givers were relatively poor. What seems to mat- ter is not the amount, but how much impact you think your donation will have on others.

• People are happier when they spend money on experiences rather than products. Research professor Thom- as Gilovich says we think to our- selves, “I have a limited amount of money, and I can either go there, or I can have this. If I go there, it’ll be great, but it’ll be over in no time. If I buy this thing, at least I’ll always have it. That is factually true, but not psychologically true. We adapt to our material goods.”

• People are happier when they buy time . . . but only if they use it well. Outsource tasks when you can, for instance, and “think of it as ‘windfall time’ and use it to do something good,” says researcher Elizabeth Dunn.

Saying that money brings more hap- piness when spent on our experiences (and the time to do them) may seem counterintuitive until we think about it closely. What did you think of your cell phone when you bought it compared to what you think of it now? Chances are you were interested and engaged when you bought it, but now it is an everyday object. For experiences, what did you think of your greatest vacation when you were on it, and what do you think of it now? Both the experience at the time and the recollection now may bring a smile to your face.

Sources: A. Blackman, “Can Money Buy Hap- piness?” The Wall Street Journal, November 10, 2014, R1, R2; D. Kurtzleben, “Finally: Proof That Money Buys Happiness (Sort Of),” USNews.com, April 29, 2013; and A. Novot- ney, “Money Can’t Buy Happiness,” Monitor on Psychology (July/August 2012): 24–26.

Money can’t buy Happiness Myth or science?

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 249

the medical device manufacturer Medtronic invites people to describe how its products have improved, or even saved, their lives and shares these stories with employees during annual meetings, providing the employees a powerful reminder of the impact of their work. For another example, researchers found that when university fundraisers briefly interacted with the undergraduates who would receive the scholarship money they raised, they persisted 42 percent longer than and raised nearly twice as much money as those who didn’t interact with potential recipients.15 The positive impact was apparent even when fund- raisers met with just a single scholarship recipient.

Personal contact with beneficiaries may not always be necessary. One study found that radiologists who saw photographs of patients whose scans they were examining made more accurate diagnoses of their medical problems. Why? Seeing the photos made it more personal, which elicited feelings of empathy in the radiologists.16

Why do these connections have such positive consequences? Meeting ben- eficiaries firsthand—or even just seeing pictures of them—allows employees to see that their actions affect a real person and have tangible consequences. It makes customers or clients more memorable and emotionally vivid, which leads employees to consider the effects of their work actions more. Finally, connec- tions allow employees to easily take the perspective of beneficiaries, which fos- ters higher levels of commitment.

You might be wondering whether connecting employees with the benefi- ciaries of their work is already covered by the idea of task significance in job characteristics theory. However, some differences make beneficiary contact unique. For one, many jobs might be perceived to be high in significance, yet employees in those jobs never meet the individuals affected by their work. Sec- ond, beneficiary contact seems to have a distinct relationship with prosocial behaviors such as helping others. For example, one study found that lifeguards who read stories about how their actions benefited swimmers were rated as more helpful by their bosses; this was not the case for lifeguards who read stories

Medical device maker Stryker provides opportunities for its employees to connect with people affected by their work. Shown here are its employees with endurance athlete Daren Wendell (center, in hat), who has an implanted titanium rod in his leg that Stryker produced. Source: Diane Bondareff/Invsion for Stryker/AP Images

250 PART 2 The Individual

about the personal benefits of their work for themselves.17 The upshot? There are many ways you can design jobs to be more motivating, and your choice should depend on the outcomes you’d like to achieve.

Relational job design, with its focus on prosocial motivation, is an espe- cially salient topic for organizations with corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives. As we discussed in earlier chapters, CSR efforts often include invi- tations for employees to volunteer their time and effort, sometimes using the skills they gained on the job (like Home Depot employees when they help rebuild homes) but often not (such as when bank employees help rebuild homes with groups like Habitat for Humanity). In both cases, the employees may be able to interact with the beneficiaries of their efforts, and research indicates that corporate-sponsored volunteer programs enhanced in the JCM dimensions of meaningfulness and task significance motivate employees to volunteer.18 But while this motivation for prosocial behavior is noteworthy, it is not the same as relational job design: for one, the CSR efforts are through volunteering (not on-the-job); and for another, the work they are providing is not usually the same work they do at their jobs (Home Depot workers do not build homes on the job). However, relational job design holds intriguing pos- sibilities for CSR initiatives.

PersonAl InvenTory AssessmenTs Diagnosing the Need for Team Building We might be tempted to think that assembling a group for a project is team building, but intentional team building is much different. Take this PIA to find out how to diagnose the need for planned team building.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

Alternative Work Arrangements As you surely know, there are many approaches toward motivating people, and we’ve discussed some of them. Another approach to motivation is to consider alternative work arrangements such as flextime, job sharing, and telecom- muting. These are likely to be especially important for a diverse workforce of dual-earner couples, single parents, and employees caring for a sick or aging relative.

Flextime Susan is the classic “morning person.” Every day she rises at 5:00 a.m. sharp, full of energy. However, as she puts it, “I’m usually ready for bed right after the 7:00 p.m. news.”

Susan’s work schedule as a claims processor at The Hartford Financial Ser- vices Group is flexible. Her office opens at 6:00 a.m. and closes at 7:00 p.m., and she schedules her 8-hour day within this 13-hour period. Because she is a morn- ing person whose 7-year-old son gets out of school at 3:00 p.m. every day, Susan opts to work from 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. “My work hours are perfect. I’m at the job when I’m mentally most alert, and I can be home to take care of my son after he gets out of school.”

Susan’s schedule is an example of flextime, short for “flexible work time.” Flextime employees must work a specific number of hours per week but may

8-3 explain how specific alternative work arrangements can motivate employees.

flextime Flexible work hours.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 251

vary their hours of work within limits. As in Exhibit 8-2, each day consists of a common core, usually 6 hours, with a flexibility band surrounding it. The core may be 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., with the office actually opening at 6:00 a.m. and closing at 6:00 p.m. Employees must be at their jobs during the common core period, but they may accumulate their other 2 hours around that. Some flextime programs allow employees to accumulate extra hours and turn them into days off.

Flextime has become extremely popular. According to a recent survey, a majority (60 percent) of U.S. organizations offer some form of flextime.19 This is not just a U.S. phenomenon, though. In Germany, for instance, 73 percent of businesses offer flextime, and such practices are becoming more widespread in Japan as well.20 In Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and France, by law employers are not allowed to refuse an employee’s request for either a part-time or a flexible work schedule as long as the request is reasonable, such as to care for an infant child.21

Claimed benefits of flextime include reduced absenteeism, increased pro- ductivity, reduced overtime expenses, reduced hostility toward management, reduced traffic congestion,22 elimination of tardiness, and increased autonomy and responsibility for employees—any of which may increase employee job sat- isfaction.23 But what is flextime’s actual record?

Most of the evidence stacks up favorably. Perhaps most important from the organization’s perspective, flextime increases profitability. Interestingly, though, this effect seems to occur only when flextime is promoted as a work–life balance strategy (not when it is for the organization’s gain).24 Flextime also tends to reduce absenteeism,25 probably for several reasons. Employees can schedule their work hours to align with personal demands, reducing tardiness and absences, and they can work when they are most productive. Flextime can also help employees balance work and family lives; it is a popular criterion for judging how “family friendly” a workplace is.

Flextime’s major drawback is that it’s not applicable to every job or every worker. It works well for clerical tasks when an employee’s interaction with people outside the department is limited, but it is not a viable option for receptionists

PricewaterhouseCoopers provides flex- ible work options that allow employees to control how and when their work gets done. PwC employees like Global Mobility Process and Quality Managers Robin Croft and Shari Alatorre, shown here, may choose flexible work plans that include flextime, job sharing, and telecommuting. Source: Eve Edelheit/Tampa Bay Times/ZUMAPRESS

.com/Alamy

252 PART 2 The Individual

or salespeople in retail stores—anyone whose service job requires being at a workstation at predetermined times. It also appears that people who have a strong desire to separate their work and family lives are less apt to want flextime, so it’s not a motivator for everyone.26 Those who ask for it are often stigmatized, which can be avoided only if the majority of the organization’s leaders adopt flexible hours to signal that flextime is acceptable.27 And finally, research in the United Kingdom indicated that employees in organizations with flextime do not realize a reduction in their levels of stress, suggesting that this option may not truly improve work–life balance.28 Since flextime is intuitively a worthwhile business practice, these findings suggest additional research is needed to deter- mine the motivational aspects of flextime.

Job sharing Job sharing allows two or more individuals to split a traditional full-time job. One employee might perform the job from 8:00 a.m. to noon, perhaps, and the other from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., or the two could work full but alternate days. For example, top Ford engineers Julie Levine and Julie Rocco engaged in a job-sharing program that allowed both of them to spend time with their families while redesigning the Explorer crossover. Typically, one of them would work late afternoons and evenings while the other worked mornings. They both

job sharing An arrangement that allows two or more individuals to split a traditional 40-hour-a-week job.

Possible Flextime staff schedulesExhibit 8-2

Schedule 1

Percent Time: 100% = 40 hours per week Core Hours: 9:00 A.M.–5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday

(1 hour lunch) Work Start Time: Between 8:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. Work End Time: Between 5:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M.

Schedule 2

Percent Time: 100% = 40 hours per week Work Hours: 8:00 A.M.–6:30 P.M., Monday through Thursday

(1/2 hour lunch) Friday off

Work Start Time: 8:00 A.M. Work End Time: 6:30 P.M.

Schedule 3

Percent Time: 90% = 36 hours per week Work Hours: 8:30 A.M.–5:00 P.M., Monday through Thursday

(1/2 hour lunch) 8:00 A.M.–Noon Friday (no lunch)

Work Start Time: 8:30 A.M. (Monday–Thursday); 8:00 A.M. (Friday) Work End Time: 5:00 P.M. (Monday–Thursday); Noon (Friday)

Schedule 4

Percent Time: 80% = 32 hours per week 8:00 A.M.–6:00 P.M., Monday through Wednesday (1/2 hour lunch)

Work Hours:

8:00 A.M.–11:30 A.M. Thursday (no lunch) Friday off

Work Start Time: Between 8:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. Work End Time: Between 5:00 P.M. and 6:00 P.M.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 253

agreed that the program worked well, although making it feasible required a great deal of time and preparation.29

Only 18 percent of U.S. organizations offered job sharing in 2014, a 29 percent decrease since 2008.30 Reasons it is not more widely adopted include the difficulty of finding compatible partners to job share and the historically negative perceptions of individuals not completely committed to their jobs and employers. However, eliminating job sharing for these reasons might be short-sighted. Job sharing allows an organization to draw on the talents of more than one individual for a given job. It opens the opportunity to acquire skilled workers—for instance, parents with young children and retirees—who might not be available on a full-time basis. From the employee’s perspective, job sharing can increase motivation and satisfaction.

An employer’s decision to use job sharing is often based on economics and national policy. Two part-time employees sharing a job can be less expensive in terms of salary and benefits than one full-timer, but experts suggest this is not often the case because training, coordination, and administrative costs can be high. On the other hand, in the United States the Affordable Care Act may create a financial incentive for companies to increase job-sharing arrangements in order to avoid the requirement to provide health care to full-time employees.31 Many German and Japanese32 firms have been using job sharing—but for a very different reason. Germany’s Kurzarbeit program, which is now close to 100 years old, kept employment levels from plummeting throughout the economic crisis by switching full-time workers to part-time job sharing work.33

Ideally, employers should consider each employee and job separately, seeking to match the skills, personality, and needs of the employee with the tasks required for the job, taking into account that individual’s motivat- ing factors.

telecommuting It might be close to the ideal job for many people: no rush hour traf- fic, flexible  hours, freedom to dress as you please, and few interruptions. Telecommuting refers to working at home—or anywhere else the employee chooses that is outside the workplace—at least 2 days a week on a computer linked to the employer’s office.34 (A closely related concept—working from a virtual office—describes working outside the workplace on a relatively perma- nent basis.) A sales manager working from home is telecommuting, but a sales manager working from her car on a business trip is not.

Telecommuting seems to mesh with the cultural transition to knowledge work (which often can be performed anywhere), and as the OB Poll on page 255 indicates, people with more education are more apt to work from home. However, telecommuting has been a popular topic lately not for its potential, but for its organizational acceptance, or lack thereof. Despite the benefits of telecommuting, large organizations such as Yahoo! and Best Buy have elim- inated it.35 Yahoo! CEO Marissa Mayer discussed how telecommuting may undermine corporate culture, noting, “People are more productive when they’re alone, but they’re more collaborative and innovative when they’re together.”36

While the movement away from telecommuting by some companies made headlines, it appears that for most organizations, it remains popular. Almost 50 percent of managers in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States are permitted telecommuting options. In developing countries, this percentage is between 10 and 20 percent.37 Organizations that actively encourage telecom- muting include Amazon, IBM, American Express,38 Intel, Cisco Systems,39 and

telecommuting Working from home at least 2 days a week on a computer that is linked to the employer’s office.

254 PART 2 The Individual

My job is great, but I can’t understand why management won’t allow flextime. After all, I often work on a laptop in the office! I could just as easily be working on the same laptop at home without interruptions from my colleagues. I know I’d be more productive. How can I convince them to let me?

— Sophia

Dear Sophia: We can’t help but wonder two things: 1) is the ban on working from home a company policy, or your manager’s policy; and 2) do you want flextime, or telecommuting? If you work for Yahoo!, for instance, you may not be able to convince anyone to let you work from home after CEO Marissa Mayer’s very public decree against the policy. If the ban is your manager’s policy—or even your division’s policy—in an organiza- tion open to alternative work arrange- ments, you just may be able to get your way.

That leads us to the second ques- tion, about flextime versus telecommut- ing. If you want flextime as you stated and just want to work from home dur- ing some non-core hours (say, work in the office for 6 hours a day and work another 2 hours a day from home), your employer may be more likely to grant your wish than if you want to complete- ly telecommute (work all your hours from home).

Research indicates that employ- ees are most likely to be granted

work from home privileges as a result of a direct sympathetic relationship with their managers (not as a result of a company policy). Employees are also more likely to gain acceptance for partial than for full telecommut- ing (either flextime or by alternating days). It helps if you have a legiti- mate need to be home and if you do knowledge-based work. Jared Dalton, for instance, telecommutes 2 days a week as a manager for account- ing firm Ernst & Young, and his wife Christina telecommutes on 2 different days, so they can oversee the care of their infant.

If it sounds like flextime depends on favoritism, you might be right. It’s also, however, a reflection of the state of telecommuting: only 38 percent of U.S. organizations permit some of their em- ployees to regularly work from home. To be one of the lucky few:

• Check your organization’s flexible options policies.

• Develop a plan for working from home to show your manager. Include how many hours/week, which days/ week, and where you will work, and explain how your manager can retain oversight of you.

• Assemble evidence on your produc- tivity. Have you worked from home before? If so, show how much you achieved. You stated you would be more productive at home: How much more?

• Outline your reasons for working from home. Do you need to help care for an aging relative, for instance? Would working from home save you com- muting time you could use for work?

• Address management’s concerns. Research indicates the biggest ones are the possibility of abuse of the system and issues of fairness.

• Consider your relationship with your manager. Has he or she been sup- portive of you in the past? Is your manager approachable?

When you’re ready, discuss your re- quest with your manager. Remember, pitching the idea of telecommuting is the same as pitching any idea—you’ve got to think about what’s in it for your employer, not for yourself.

Sources: “The 2015 Workplace Flexibility Study,” WorkplaceTrends.com, February 3, 2015, https://workplacetrends.com/the- 2015-workplace-flexibility-study/; T. S. Ber- nard, “For Workers, Less Flexible Compa- nies,” The New York Times, May 20, 2014, B1, B7; and C. C. Miller and L. Alderman, “The Flexibility Gap,” The New York Times, December 14, 2014, 1, 5.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

How can i get flextime? Career oBjectives

a number of U.S. government agencies.40 Telecommuting is less practiced in China, but there, too, it is growing.41

What kinds of jobs lend themselves to telecommuting? Writers, attorneys, analysts, and employees who spend the majority of their time on computers or the telephone—including telemarketers, customer-service representatives, res- ervation agents, and product-support specialists—are candidates. As telecom- muters, they can access information on their computers at home as easily as in the company’s office.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 255

Telecommuting has several potential benefits. These include a larger labor pool from which to select (some people can/will only work by telecommuting), higher productivity, improved morale, and reduced office-space costs. A posi- tive relationship exists between telecommuting and supervisor performance ratings, but a relationship between telecommuting and potentially lower turn- over intentions has not been substantiated in research to date.42 Beyond the benefits to organizations and their employees, telecommuting has potential benefits to society. One study estimated that if people in the United States tele- commuted half the time, carbon emissions would be reduced by approximately 51 metric tons per year. Environmental savings could come about from lower office energy consumption, fewer traffic jams that emit greenhouse gasses, and a reduced need for road repairs.43

Telecommuting has several downsides too. The major one for management is less direct supervision. In today’s team-focused workplace, telecommuting may also make it more difficult for managers to coordinate teamwork, and it can reduce knowledge transfer in organizations.44 Managers are also challenged to handle the demotivation of office workers who feel they are unfairly denied the freedom of telecommuters.45 Contrary to Mayer’s conclusions for Yahoo!, research indicates that more creative tasks may actually be best suited for tele- commuting, whereas dull repetitive tasks like data entry decrease motivation and thus performance for remote workers.46

From the employee’s standpoint, telecommuting can increase feelings of isolation and reduce job satisfaction.47 Research indicates it does not reduce work–family conflicts, perhaps because it often increases work hours beyond the contracted workweek.48 Telecommuters are also vulnerable to the “out of sight, out of mind” effect: Employees who aren’t at their desks, miss meetings, and don’t share in day-to-day informal workplace interactions may be at a dis- advantage when it comes to raises and promotions because they’re perceived as not putting in the requisite “face-time.”49 As for a CSR benefit of reducing car emissions by allowing telecommuting, research indicates that employees actually drive over 45 miles more per day, due to increased personal trips, when they telecommute!50

Ob POLL Who Works from Home?

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 6 from Economic News Release, “American Time Use Survey Summary,” June 20, 2013, www.bls.gov/news

.release/atus.t06.htm.

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

Bachelor’s degree or

higher

38.4%

Percentage of people working from home

Some college or

associate degree

21.1%

High school diploma

only

12.7%

Less than high school

diploma

5.4%

256 PART 2 The Individual

Telecommuting is a contemporary reality, particularly in the minds of employees. However, initial studies suggest they view it differently in different cultures. For example, in China and perhaps in other collectivist cultures, employees are more comfortable with telecommuting when they clearly know what is expected of them and can acknowledge their manager’s superiority in their communications.51 The success of telecommuting will always depend on the quality of communications in order to establish good, though remote, working relationships. Telecommuting certainly does appear to make sense given changes in technology, the nature of work, and preferences of younger workers. Yet as the Yahoo! experience shows, some leaders do not think those benefits outweigh the costs.

Employee Involvement and Participation Employee involvement and participation (EIP)52 is a process that uses employees’ input to increase their commitment to organizational success. If workers are engaged in decisions that increase their autonomy and control over their work lives, they will become more motivated, more committed to the organization, more productive, and more satisfied with their jobs. These benefits don’t stop with individuals—when teams are given more control over their work, morale and performance increase as well.53

To be successful, EIP programs should be tailored to local and national norms.54 A study of four countries, including India and the United States, confirmed the importance of modifying practices to reflect national culture.55 While U.S. employees readily accepted EIP programs, managers in India who tried to empower their employees were rated low by those employees. These reactions are consistent with India’s high power–distance culture, which accepts and expects differences in authority. The work culture in India may not be in as much transition as in China, in which some employees are becoming less high power–distance oriented. Chinese workers who were very accepting of traditional Chinese cultural values showed few benefits from participative decision making. However, Chinese workers who were less traditional were more satisfied and had higher performance ratings under participative management.56 Another study conducted in China showed that involvement increased employees’ thoughts and feelings of job security, enhancing their well-being.57 These differences within China may well reflect the current transitional nature of that culture. For example, research in urban China indicated that some aspects of EIP programs, namely those that favor consultation and expression but not participation in decision making, yield higher job satisfaction.58

examples of employee involvement Programs Let’s look at two major forms of employee involvement—participative manage- ment and representative participation—in more detail.

Participative Management Common to all participative management programs is joint decision making, in which subordinates share a significant degree of decision-making power with their immediate superiors. This sharing can occur either formally through, say, briefings or surveys, or informally through daily consultations, as a way to enhance motivation through trust and commitment.59 Participative management has, at times, been considered a panacea for poor morale and low productivity. In reality, for participative management to be effec- tive, followers must have trust and confidence in their leaders. Leaders should avoid coercive techniques and instead stress the organizational consequences of decision making to their followers.60

8-4 Describe how employee involvement measures can motivate employees.

employee involvement and participation (EIP) A participative process that uses the input of employees to increase employee commitment to organizational success.

participative management A process in which subordinates share a significant degree of decision-making power with their immediate superiors.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 257

Studies of the participation–performance relationship have yielded mixed findings.61 Organizations that institute participative management may realize higher stock returns, lower turnover rates, and higher labor productivity, although these effects are typically not large.62 Research at the individual level indicates participation typically has only a modest influence on employee productivity, motivation, and job satisfaction. This doesn’t mean participative management isn’t beneficial. However, it is not a sure means for improving performance.

Representative Participation Most countries in western Europe require companies to practice representative participation. Representative participa- tion redistributes power within an organization, putting labor’s interests on a more equal footing with the interests of management and stockholders by including a small group of employees as participants in decision making. In the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, and New Zealand, representative participation was originally the only EIP program, formed to allow employee representatives to discuss issues outside union agreements, and the representa- tives were all from the union. However, representative groups are now increas- ingly a mix of union and nonunion, or separate from the union arrangement.63

The two most common forms of representation are works councils and board representatives. Works councils are groups of nominated or elected employees who must be consulted when management makes decisions about employees. Board representatives are employees who sit on a company’s board of directors and represent employees’ interests.

The influence of representative participation on working employees seems to be mixed, but generally an employee would need to feel his or her interests are well represented and make a difference to the organization in order for motivation to increase. Thus representative participation as a motivational tool is surpassed by more direct participation methods.

In sum, EIP programs clearly have the potential to increase employees’ intrinsic motivation. The opportunity to make and implement decisions—and

representative participation A system in which workers participate in organizational decision making through a small group of representative employees.

Bernd Osterloh, chairman of Volkswagen’s works councils, speaks to production line workers at company headquarters in Wolfsburg, Germany. VW includes employees in decision making by allowing them to participate in discussions about work rules, the company’s finances and business plans, and workplace productivity and safety. Source: Fabian Bimmer/Reuters

258 PART 2 The Individual

then see them work out—can contribute to all desirable organizational out- comes. And giving employees control over key decisions, along with ensuring that their interests are represented, can enhance feelings of procedural justice. But, like any other initiatives, EIP programs must be carefully designed.

Using Rewards to Motivate Employees As we saw in Chapter 3, pay is not the only factor driving job satisfaction. Howev- er, it does motivate people, and companies often underestimate its importance. One study found that while 45 percent of employers thought pay was a key factor in losing top talent, 71 percent of top performers called it a top reason.64

Given that pay is so important, will the organization lead, match, or lag the market in pay? How will individual contributions be recognized? In this section, we consider (1) what to pay employees (decided by establishing a pay structure), and (2) how to pay individual employees (decided through variable-pay plans).

What to Pay: establishing a Pay structure There are many ways to pay employees. The process of initially setting pay levels entails balancing internal equity—the worth of the job to the organization (usu- ally established through a technical process called job evaluation), and external equity—the competitiveness of an organization’s pay relative to pay in its industry (usually established through pay surveys). Obviously, the best pay system reflects what the job is worth while also staying competitive relative to the labor market.

Some organizations prefer to pay above the market, while some may lag the market because they can’t afford to pay market rates, or they are willing to bear the costs of paying below market (namely, higher turnover as people are lured to better-paying jobs). Some companies that have realized impressive gains in income and profit margins have done so in part by holding down employee wages; they include Comcast, Walt Disney, McDonald’s, and AT&T.65

Pay more, and you may get better-qualified, more highly motivated employees who will stay with the organization longer. A study covering 126 large

8-5 Demonstrate how the different types of variable- pay programs can increase employee motivation.

Cary Chin works at the front desk for Gravity Payments, a credit card processing firm in Seattle, where the cost of living is extremely high. Gravity’s CEO Dan Price established a new pay structure for all employees of a $70,000 base salary to improve their quality of life and motivate them to work harder on achieving high customer satisfaction. Source: Ted S. Warren/AP Images

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 259

organizations found employees who believed they were receiving a competitive pay level had higher morale and were more productive, and customers were more satisfied as well.66 But pay is often the highest single operating cost for an organization, which means paying too much can make the organization’s products or services too expensive. It’s a strategic decision an organization must make, with clear trade-offs.

In the case of Walmart, it appears that its strategic decision on pay did not work. While annual growth in U.S. stores slowed to around 1 percent in 2011, one of Walmart’s larger competitors, Costco, grew around 8 percent. The average worker at Costco made approximately $45,000, compared to approxi- mately $17,500 for the average worker at Walmart-owned Sam’s Club. Costco’s strategy was that it will get more if it pays more—and higher wages resulted in increased employee productivity and reduced turnover. Given the recent Walmart decision to increase worker wages throughout the organization, perhaps its executives agree.67

How to Pay: Rewarding individual employees through variable-Pay Programs “Why should I put any extra effort into this job?” asked Anne, a fourth-grade elementary schoolteacher in Denver, Colorado. “I can excel or I can do the bare minimum. It makes no difference. I get paid the same. Why do anything above the minimum to get by?” Comments like Anne’s have been voiced by schoolteach- ers for decades because pay increases were tied to seniority. Recently, however, a number of states have revamped their compensation systems to motivate teachers by linking pay to results in the classroom, and other states are considering such programs, admittedly with mixed results so far.68 Many organizations, public and private, are moving away from pay based on seniority or credentials.

Piece-rate, merit-based, bonus, profit-sharing, and employee stock ownership plans are all forms of a variable-pay program (also known as pay-for- performance), which bases a portion of an employee’s pay on some individual and/or orga- nizational measure of performance. The variable portion may be all or part of the paycheck, and it may be paid annually or upon attainment of benchmarks. It can also be either optional for the employee or an accepted condition of employment.69 Variable-pay plans have long been used to compensate sales- people and executives, but the scope of variable-pay jobs has broadened.

Globally, around 80 percent of companies offer some form of variable-pay plan. In the United States, 91 percent of companies offer a variable-pay pro- gram.70 In Latin America, more than 90 percent of companies offer some form of variable-pay plan. Latin American companies also have the highest percent- age of total payroll allocated to variable pay, at nearly 18 percent. European and U.S. companies are lower, at about 12 percent.71 When it comes to executive compensation, Asian companies are outpacing Western companies in their use of variable pay.72

Unfortunately, not all employees see a strong connection between pay and performance. The results of pay-for-performance plans are mixed; the context and receptivity of the individual to the plans play a large role. For instance, one study of 415 companies in South Korea suggested that group-based pay-for-performance plans may have a strong positive effect on organizational performance.73 On the other hand, research in Canada indicated that variable-pay plans increase job satisfaction only if employee effort is rewarded as well as performance.74 Finally, secrecy pays a role in the motivational success of variable-pay plans. Although in some government and not-for-profit agencies, pay amounts are either specifi- cally or generally made public, most U.S. organizations encourage or require pay secrecy.75 Is this good or bad? Unfortunately, it’s bad: pay secrecy has a detrimental

variable-pay program A pay plan that bases a portion of an employee’s pay on some individual and/or organizational measure of performance.

260 PART 2 The Individual

effect on job performance. Even worse, it adversely affects high performers more than other employees. It very likely increases employees’ perception that pay is subjective, which can be demotivating. While individual pay amounts may not need to be broadcast to restore the balance, if general pay categories are made public and employees feel variable pay is linked objectively to their performance, the motivational effects of variable pay can be retained.76

The fluctuation in variable pay is what makes these programs attractive to management. It turns part of an organization’s fixed labor costs into a variable cost, thus reducing expenses when performance declines. For example, when the U.S. economy encountered a recession in 2001 and again in 2008, compa- nies with variable pay were able to reduce their labor costs much faster than others.77 When pay is tied to performance, the employee’s earnings also reflect their contributions rather than being a form of entitlement. Over time, low performers’ pay stagnates, while high performers enjoy pay increases commen- surate with their contributions.

Let’s examine the different types of variable-pay programs in more detail.

Piece-Rate Pay The piece-rate pay plan has long been popular as a means of compensating production workers with a fixed sum for each unit of production completed, but it can be used in any organizational setting where the outputs are similar enough to be evaluated by quantity. A pure piece-rate plan provides no base salary and pays the employee only for what he or she produces. Ball- park workers selling peanuts and soda are frequently paid piece-rate. If they sell 40 bags of peanuts at $1 each for their earnings, their take is $40. The more peanuts they sell, the more they earn. Alternatively, piece-rate plans are some- times distributed to sales teams, so a ballpark worker makes money on a portion of the total number of bags of peanuts sold by the group during a game.

Piece-rate plans are known to produce higher productivity and wages, so they can be attractive to organizations and motivating for workers.78 In fact, one major Chinese university increased its piece-rate pay for articles by professors and realized 50 percent increased research productivity.79 In the workplace, employees most likely to be motivated by piece-rate plans are managers and more tenured workers. Low-performing workers are generally not interested in piece-rate pay, for obvious reasons—they won’t get paid much!

The chief concern of both individual and team piece-rate workers is finan- cial risk. A recent experiment in Germany found that 68 percent of risk-averse individuals prefer an individual piece-rate system, and that lower performers prefer team piece-rate pay. Why? The authors suggested risk-averse and high- performing individuals would rather take their chances on pay based on what they can control (their own work) because they are concerned others will slack off in a team setting.80 This is a valid concern, as we will discuss in the next chapter. Organizations, on the other hand, should verify that their piece-rate plans are indeed motivating to individuals. European research has suggested that when the pace of work is determined by uncontrollable outside factors such as customer requests, rather than internal factors such as coworkers, targets, and machines, a piece rate plan is not motivating.81 Either way, managers must be mindful of the motivation for workers to decrease quality in order to increase their speed of output. They should also be aware that by rewarding volume, piece-rate plans increase the probability of workplace injuries.82

Thus, while piece-rate plans can be a powerful motivator in many organizational settings, an obvious limitation is that they’re not feasible for many jobs. An emergency room (ER) doctor and nurse can earn significant sala- ries regardless of the number of patients they see or their patients’ outcomes. Would it be better to pay them only if their patients fully recover? It seems unlikely that most would accept such a deal, and it might cause unanticipated

piece-rate pay plan A pay plan in which workers are paid a fixed sum for each unit of production completed.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 261

consequences as well (such as ERs turning away patients with terminal diseases or life-threatening injuries). So, although incentives are motivating and rele- vant for some jobs, it is unrealistic to think they work universally.

Merit-Based Pay A merit-based pay plan pays for individual performance based on performance appraisal ratings. A main advantage is that high performers can get bigger raises. If designed correctly, merit-based plans let individuals per- ceive a strong relationship between their performance and their rewards.83

Most large organizations have merit pay plans, especially for salaried employ- ees. Merit pay is slowly taking hold in the public sector. For example, most U.S. government employees are unionized, and the unions that represent them have usually demanded that pay raises be based solely on seniority. Claiming a new era of accountability, however, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie implemented merit pay for teachers. The Newark teachers union approved the plan, which included funding from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.84 In another unusual move, New York City’s public hospital system pays doctors based on how well they reduce costs, increase patient satisfaction, and improve the quality of care.85

A move away from merit pay, on the other hand, is coming from some orga- nizations that don’t feel it separates high and low performers enough. “There’s a very strong belief and there’s evidence and academic research that shows that variable pay does create focus among employees,” said Ken Abosch, a com- pensation manager at human resource consulting firm Aon Hewitt. But when the annual review and raise are months away, the motivation of this reward for high performers diminishes. Even companies that have retained merit pay are rethinking the allocation.86

Although you might think a person’s average level of performance is the key factor in merit pay decisions, the projected level of future performance also plays a role. One study found that National Basketball Association (NBA) players whose performance was on an upward trend were paid more than their average performance would have predicted. Managers of all organizations may unknowingly be basing merit pay decisions on how they think employees will perform, which may result in overly optimistic (or pessimistic) pay decisions.87

Despite their intuitive appeal, merit pay plans have several limitations. One is that they are typically based on an annual performance appraisal and thus are only as valid as the performance ratings, which are often subjective. This brings up issues of discrimination, as we discussed in Chapter 2. Research indi- cates that African American employees receive lower performance ratings than white employees, women’s ratings are higher than men’s, and there are demo- graphic differences in the distribution of salary increases, even with all other factors equal.88 Another limitation is that the pay-raise pool of available funds fluctuates on economic or other conditions that have little to do with individ- ual performance. For instance, a colleague at a top university who performed very well in teaching and research was given a pay raise of $300. Why? Because the pay-raise pool was very small. Yet that amount is more of a cost-of-living increase than pay-for-performance. Lastly, unions typically resist merit pay plans. Relatively few teachers are covered by merit pay for this reason. Instead, seniority-based pay, which gives all employees the same raises, predominates.

The concept and intention of merit pay—that employees are paid for per- formance—is sound. For employee motivation purposes, however, merit pay should be only one part of a performance recognition program.

Bonus An annual bonus is a significant component of total compensation for many jobs. Once reserved for upper management, bonus plans are now routinely offered to employees in all levels of the organization. The incentive effects should be higher than those of merit pay because rather than paying for

merit-based pay plan A pay plan based on performance appraisal ratings.

bonus A pay plan that rewards employees for recent performance rather than historical performance.

262 PART 2 The Individual

previous performance now rolled into base pay, bonuses reward recent perfor- mance (merit pay is cumulative, but the increases are generally much smaller than bonus amounts). When times are bad, firms can cut bonuses to reduce compensation costs. Workers on Wall Street, for example, saw their average bonus drop by more than a third as their firms faced greater scrutiny.89

Bonus plans have a clear upside: they are motivating for workers. As an example, a recent study in India found that when a higher percentage of overall pay was reserved for the potential bonuses of managers and employees, produc- tivity increased.90 This example also highlights the downside of bonuses: They leave employees’ pay more vulnerable to cuts. This is problematic especially when employees depend on bonuses or take them for granted. “People have begun to live as if bonuses were not bonuses at all but part of their expected annual income,” said Jay Lorsch, a Harvard Business School professor. KeySpan Corp., a 9,700-employee utility company in New York, combined yearly bonuses with a smaller merit-pay raise. Elaine Weinstein, KeySpan’s senior vice president of HR, credits the plan with changing the culture from “entitlement to meritocracy.”91

The way bonuses and rewards are categorized also affects peoples’ moti- vation. Although it is a bit manipulative, splitting rewards and bonuses into categories—even if the categories are meaningless—may increase motivation.92 Why? Because people are more likely to feel they missed out on a reward if they don’t receive one from each category, and then work harder to earn rewards from more categories.

Profit-sharing Plan A profit-sharing plan distributes compensation based on some established formula designed around a company’s profitability. Compensation can be direct cash outlays or, particularly for top manag- ers, allocations of stock options. When you read about executives like Mark Zuckerberg, who accepts an absurdly modest $1 salary, remember that many executives are granted generous stock options. In fact, Zuckerberg has made as much as $2.3 billion after cashing out some of his stock options.93 Of course, the vast majority of profit-sharing plans are not so grand in scale. For example, Jacob Luke started his own lawn-mowing business at age 13. He employed his brother Isaiah and friend Marcel and paid them each 25 percent of the profits he made on each yard.

profit-sharing plan An organization- wide program that distributes compensation based on some established formula designed around a company’s profitability.

Chinese Internet firm Tencent Holdings rewards employees with attractive in- centives that include cash bonuses for lower-ranking employees. The young men shown here were among 5,000 employees who received a special bonus tucked in red envelopes and personally handed out by Tencent’s CEO and co-founder Pony Ma. Source: Keita Wen sz/Imaginechina via AP Images

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 263

Studies generally support the idea that organizations with profit-sharing plans have higher levels of profitability than those without them.94 These plans have also been linked to higher levels of employee commitment, especially in small organizations.95 Profit-sharing at the organizational level appears to have positive impacts on employee attitudes; employees report a greater feeling of psychological ownership.96 Recent research in Canada indicates that profit- sharing plans motivate individuals to higher job performance when they are used in combination with other pay-for-performance plans.97 Obviously, profit sharing does not work when there is no reported profit per se, such as in non- profit organizations, or often in the public sector. However, profit sharing may make sense for many organizations, large or small.

employee stock ownership Plan An employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) is a company-established benefit plan in which employees acquire stock, often at below-market prices, as part of their benefits. Research on ESOPs indicates they increase employee satisfaction and innovation.98 ESOPs have the poten- tial to increase job satisfaction only when employees psychologically experience ownership.99 Even so, ESOPs may not inspire lower absenteeism or greater motivation,100 perhaps because the employee’s actual monetary benefit comes with cashing in the stock at a later date. Thus, employees need to be kept regu- larly informed of the status of the business and have the opportunity to positively influence it in order to feel motivated toward higher personal performance.101

ESOPs for top management can reduce unethical behavior. For instance, CEOs are less likely to manipulate firm earnings reports to make themselves

employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) A company-established benefits plan in which employees acquire stock, often at below-market prices, as part of their benefits.

Industrialized countries have come a long way in terms of worker safety and compensation. The number of worker-related injuries has decreased substantially over generations, and many employees earn better wages than in the past. Unfortunately, the same can- not be said for all parts of the world.

To keep costs down, many Western companies and their managers turn to suppliers in developing nations, where people have little choice but to work for low pay and no benefits, in top-down management structures without par- ticipative management opportunities or unions to represent them. Unregulated and even unsafe working conditions are common, especially in the garment in- dustry. However, three recent accidents in Bangladesh are raising questions about the ethics of tolerating and sup- porting such conditions. In November 2012, a fire at the Tazreen Fashion fac- tory that made low-cost garments for

several U.S. stores, including Walmart, killed 112 workers. In April 2013, the collapse of Rana Plaza, home to a num- ber of garment factories, killed more than 1,100. And in May 2013, a fire at the Tung Hai Sweater Company killed 8 workers. An investigation of the Rana Plaza incident revealed that the building had been constructed without permits, using substandard materials. Although workers reported seeing and hearing cracks in the structure of the building, they were ordered back to work.

In response, some companies such as PVH, owner of Tommy Hilfiger and Calvin Klein, as well as Tchibo, a German retailer, have signed the legally binding “IndustriALL” proposal, which requires overseas manufactur- ers to conduct building and fire-safety inspections regularly and to make their findings public. However, many other companies have not signed, and none of the 15 companies whose clothing

was manufactured at the Rana Plaza plant donated to the International Labour Organization fund for survivors.

With the rise of CSR initiatives, what is the responsibility of organizations toward the working conditions of their subcontractors, at home or abroad? Professor Cindi Fukami asks, “Should [companies] outsource the production of these items made under conditions that wouldn’t be approved of in the United States, but . . . are perfectly legal in the situation where they are [pro- duced]?” There is clearly not an easy solution.

Sources: B. Kennedy, “The Bangladesh Fac- tory Collapse One Year Later,” CBS, April 23, 2014, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the- bangladesh-factory-collapse-one-year-later/; J. O’Donnell and C. Macleod, “Latest Bangla- desh Fire Puts New Pressure on Retailers,” USA Today, May 9, 2013, www.usatoday.com; and T. Hayden, “Tom Hayden: Sweatshops At- tract Western Investors,” USA Today, May 17, 2013, www.usatoday.com.

sweatshops and Worker safety an ethical Choice

264 PART 2 The Individual

look good in the short run when they have an ownership share.102 Of course, not all companies want ESOPs, and they won’t work in all situations, but they can be an important part of an organization’s motivational strategy.

evaluation of variable Pay Do variable-pay programs increase motivation and productivity? Generally yes, but that doesn’t mean everyone is equally motivat- ed by them.103 Many organizations have more than one variable pay element in operation, such as an ESOP and bonuses, so managers should evaluate the effectiveness of the overall plan in terms of the employee motivation gained from each element separately and from all elements together. Managers should monitor their employees’ performance-reward expectancy, since a combination of elements that makes employees feel that their greater performance will yield them greater rewards will be the most motivating.104

Using Benefits to Motivate Employees Now that we have discussed what and how to pay employees, let’s discuss two oth- er motivating factors organizations must decide: (1) what benefits and choices to offer (such as flexible benefits), and (2) how to construct employee recogni- tion programs. Like pay, benefits are both a provision and a motivator. Whereas organizations of yesteryear issued a standard package to every employee, con- temporary leaders understand that each employee values benefits differently. A flexible program turns the benefits package into a motivational tool.

Flexible Benefits: developing a Benefits Package Todd E. is married and has three young children; his wife is at home full-time. His Citigroup colleague Allison M. is married too, but her husband has a high- paying job with the federal government, and they have no children. Todd is concerned about having a good medical plan and enough life insurance to sup- port his family in case it’s needed. In contrast, Allison’s husband already has her medical needs covered on his plan, and life insurance is a low priority. Allison is more interested in extra vacation time and long-term financial benefits such as a tax-deferred savings plan.

A standardized benefits package would be unlikely to meet the needs of Todd and Allison well. Citigroup can, however, cover both sets of needs with flexible benefits.

Consistent with expectancy theory’s thesis that organizational rewards should be linked to each employee’s goals, flexible benefits individualize rewards by allowing each employee to choose the compensation package that best satis- fies his or her current needs and situation. Flexible benefits can accommodate differences in employee needs based on age, marital status, partner’s benefit status, and number and age of dependents.

Benefits in general can be a motivator for a person to go to work, and for a person to choose one organization over another. But are flexible benefits more motivating than traditional plans? It’s difficult to tell. Some organizations that have moved to flexible plans report increased employee retention, job satisfaction, and productivity. However, flexible benefits may not substitute for higher salaries when it comes to motivation.105 Furthermore, as more organizations worldwide adopt flexible benefits, the individual motivation they produce will likely decrease (the plans will be seen as a standard work provision). The downsides of flexible benefit plans may be obvious: They may be more costly to administrate, and identifying the motivational impact of different provisions is challenging.

8-6 show how flexible benefits turn benefits into motivators.

flexible benefits A benefits plan that allows each employee to put together a benefits package individually tailored to his or her own needs and situation.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 265

Given the intuitive motivational appeal of flexible benefits, it may be sur- prising that their usage is not yet global. In China, only a limited percentage of companies offer flexible plans,106 as in other Asian countries.107 Almost all major corporations in the United States offer them, and a recent survey of 211 Canadian organizations found that 60 percent offer flexible benefits, up from 41 percent in 2005.108 A similar survey of firms in the United Kingdom found that nearly all major organizations were offering flexible benefits programs, with options ranging from supplemental medical insurance to holiday trading (with coworkers), discounted bus travel, and child care assistance.109

Using Intrinsic Rewards to Motivate Employees We have discussed motivating employees through job design and by the extrinsic rewards of pay and benefits. On an organizational level, are those the only ways to motivate employees? Not at all! We would be remiss if we overlooked intrin- sic rewards organizations can provide, such as employee recognition programs, discussed next.

employee Recognition Programs Laura makes $8.50 per hour working at her fast-food job in Pensacola, Florida, and the job isn’t very challenging or interesting. Yet Laura talks enthusiastically about the job, her boss, and the company that employs her. “What I like is the fact that Guy [her supervisor] appreciates the effort I make. He compliments me regularly in front of the other people on my shift, and I’ve been chosen Employee of the Month twice in the past six months. Did you see my picture on that plaque on the wall?”

Organizations are increasingly realizing what Laura knows: Recognition programs and other ways of increasing an employee’s intrinsic motivation work. An employee recognition program is a plan to encourage specific behaviors by formally appreciating specific employee contributions. Employee recognition programs range from a spontaneous and private thank-you to widely publicized formal programs in which the procedures for attaining recognition are clearly identified.

As companies and government organizations face tighter budgets, nonfinan- cial incentives become more attractive. Everett Clinic in Washington State uses a combination of local and centralized initiatives to encourage managers to recog- nize employees.110 Employees and managers give “Hero Grams” and “Caught in the Act” cards to colleagues for exceptional accomplishments at work. Part of the incentive is simply to receive recognition, but there are also drawings for prizes based on the number of cards a person receives. Multinational corporations like Symantec Corporation, Intuit, and Panduit have also increased their use of recognition programs. Symantec claims it increased engagement 14 percent in less than a year due to the Applause recognition program administered by Globoforce, a corporation that implements employee recognition programs.111 Centralized programs across multiple offices in different countries can help ensure that all employees, regardless of where they work, can be recognized for their contribution to the work environment.112 Recognition programs are com- mon in Canadian and Australian firms as well.113

A few years ago, 1,500 employees were surveyed in a variety of work settings to find out what they considered the most powerful workplace motivator. Their response? Recognition, recognition, and more recognition. Other research

8-7 Identify the motivational benefits of intrinsic rewards.

employee recognition program A plan to encourage specific employee behaviors by formally appreciating specific employee contributions.

266 PART 2 The Individual

suggests financial incentives may be more motivating in the short term, but in the long run nonfinancial incentives work best.114 Surprisingly, there is not a lot of research on the motivational outcomes or global usage of employee rec- ognition programs. However, recent studies indicate that employee recognition programs are associated with self-esteem, self-efficacy, and job satisfaction,115 and the broader outcomes from intrinsic motivation are well documented.

An obvious advantage of recognition programs is that they are inexpen- sive: praise is free!116 With or without financial rewards, they can be highly motivating to employees. Despite the increased popularity of such programs, though, critics argue they are highly susceptible to political manipulation by management. When applied to jobs for which performance factors are relatively objective, such as sales, recognition programs are likely to be per- ceived by employees as fair. In most jobs, however, performance criteria aren’t self-evident, which allows managers to manipulate the system and recognize their favorites. Abuse can undermine the value of recognition programs and demoralize employees. Therefore, where formal recognition programs are used, care must be taken to ensure fairness. Where they are not, it is important to motivate employees by consistently recognizing their performance efforts.

WaTCh IT! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Zappos: Motivating Employees Through Company Culture.

Summary As we’ve seen in the chapter, understanding what motivates individuals is ulti- mately key to organizational performance. Employees whose differences are rec- ognized, who feel valued, and who have the opportunity to work in jobs tailored to their strengths and interests will be motivated to perform at the highest levels. Employee participation also can increase employee productivity, commitment to work goals, motivation, and job satisfaction. However, we cannot overlook the powerful role of organizational rewards in influencing motivation. Pay, benefits, and intrinsic rewards must be carefully and thoughtfully designed in order to enhance employee motivation toward positive organizational outcomes.

Implications for Managers ●● Recognize individual differences. Spend the time necessary to understand

what’s important to each employee. Design jobs to align with individual needs and maximize their motivation potential.

●● Use goals and feedback. You should give employees firm, specific goals, and they should get feedback on how well they are faring in pursuit of those goals.

●● Allow employees to participate in decisions that affect them. Employees can contribute to setting work goals, choosing their own benefits pack- ages, and solving productivity and quality problems.

●● Link rewards to performance. Rewards should be contingent on perfor- mance, and employees must perceive the link between the two.

●● Check the system for equity. Employees should perceive that individual effort and outcomes explain differences in pay and other rewards.

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 267

“Face-time” Matters

A lthough allowing people to work from home is gaining popu-larity, telecommuting will only hurt firms and their employers. sure, employees say they’re happier when their organization allows them the flexibility to work wherever they choose, but who wouldn’t like to hang around at home in their pajamas pretending to work? I know plenty of colleagues who say, with a wink, that they’re taking off to “work from home” the rest of the day. Who knows whether they are really contributing?

The bigger problem is the lack of face-to-face interaction between employees. studies have shown that great ideas are born through in- terdependence, not independence. It’s during those informal interac- tions around the water cooler or during coffee breaks that some of the most creative ideas arise. If you take that away, you stifle the organiza- tion’s creative potential.

Trust is another problem. ever trust someone you haven’t met? I didn’t think so. Again, face-to-face interactions allow people to estab- lish trusting relationships more quickly, which fosters smoother social interactions and allows the company to perform better.

But enough about employers. employees also benefit when they are in the office. If you’re out of sight, you’re out of mind. Want that big raise or promotion? you’re not going to get it if your supervisor doesn’t even know who you are.

so think twice the next time you either want to leave the office early or not bother coming in at all, to “work from home.”

PoInt

P lease. so-called face-time is overrated. If all managers do is reward employees who hang around the office the longest, they aren’t being very good managers. Those who brag about the 80 hours they put in at the office (being sure to point out they were there on weekends) aren’t necessarily the top performers. Being present is not the same thing as being efficient.

Besides, there are all sorts of benefits for employees and employers who take advantage of telecommuting practices. For one, it’s seen as an attractive perk companies can offer. With so many dual-career earners, the flexibility to work from home on some days can go a long way toward achieving a better balance between work and family. That translates into better recruiting and better retention. In other words, you’ll get and keep better employees if you offer the ability to work from home.

Plus, studies have shown that productivity is higher, not lower, when people work from home. This result is not limited to the United states. For example, one study found that Chinese call center employees who worked from home outproduced their “face-time” counterparts by 13 percent.

you say all these earth-shattering ideas would pour forth if people interacted. I say consider that one of the biggest workplace distrac- tions is chatty coworkers. so, although I concede there are times when “face-time” is beneficial, the benefits of telecommuting far outweigh the drawbacks.

CounterPoInt

Sources: J. surowiecki, “Face Time,” The New Yorker, march 18, 2013, www.newyorker.com; and l. Taskin and F. Bridoux, “Telework: A Challenge to Knowledge Transfer in organizations,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 21, no. 13 (2010): 2503–20.

268 PART 2 The Individual

cHaPter revieW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QuestiOns FOr revieW

8-1 How does the job characteristics model motivate individuals?

8-2 What are the major ways that jobs can be redesigned?

8-3 What are the motivational benefits of the specific alternative work arrangements?

8-4 How can employee involvement measures motivate employees?

8-5 How can the different types of variable-pay programs increase employee motivation?

8-6 How can flexible benefits motivate employees? 8-7 What are the motivational benefits of intrinsic rewards?

exPerientiaL exercise Occupations and the Job Characteristics Model Break the class into groups of three to five.

8-8. As a group, consider each of the five job char- acteristics (skill variety, task identity, task signifi- cance, autonomy, and feedback). Then, write down jobs that have high levels of each character- istic (if you can think of jobs that have high levels of multiple characteristics, note those as well). Do you think the jobs you identified are high or low paying? Why?

8-9. Next, write down jobs that have low levels of each characteristic (and if you can think of jobs that have low levels of multiple characteristics, note those as well.) Do you think the jobs you identified are high or low paying? Why?

8-10. For those jobs you identified as having low levels of job characteristics, come up with some strategies to increase them. Be specific in your recommenda- tions. Discuss these with the class.

etHicaL DiLeMMa Inmates for Hire We’ve all heard about how companies are using overseas workers to reduce labor costs, but the real cost savings for some jobs may lie with prison workers. Federal Prison Indus- tries (FPI, also called UNICOR) is a company owned by the government that employs prison inmates. Like some over- seas sweatshop workers, prisoners are paid exceptionally low rates of 23 cents to $1.15 an hour, receive no benefits for their work, and do not work in a participative manage- ment environment. The motivation for them to work hard is instead completely intrinsic: to learn trade skills and the value of work while they are incarcerated, in hopes that they will be more employable upon their release.

Although the organization is unable to supply workers to the private sector, federal agencies are required to pur- chase goods produced by its workers whenever FPI’s bids

are competitive. Steven Eisen, CFO of Tennier Industries, came face-to-face with FPI when his company lost a $45 mil- lion contract to manufacture clothing for the U.S. Defense Department. One hundred of Tennier’s workers were laid off as a result. He argues it is wrong to give jobs to prison inmates at the expense of law-abiding citizens who may be struggling to find employment. “Our government screams, howls, and yells how the rest of the world is using prisoners or slave labor to manufacture items, and here we take the items right out of the mouths of people who need it,” says Eisen.

Proponents of the program say it is beneficial to in- mates, pointing to data from the Bureau of Prisons showing that inmates who work for FPI are 24 percent less likely to be incarcerated again and 14 percent more likely to be employed when released. Traci Billingsley,

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 269

speaking for the Bureau of Prisons, states, “FPI supplies only a small fraction of the government’s goods and ser- vices. FPI also helps support American jobs as it often partners with private American companies as a supplier.”

Questions 8-11. Do you think it is fair for companies to have to

compete against prison inmates for government work? Why or why not?

8-12. Michigan representative Bill Huizenga said, “If China did this—having their prisoners work at subpar wages in prisons—we would be screaming bloody murder.” Do you agree or disagree with his statement? Why?

8-13. Do you think prisoner employees should have any benefits other workers have? Why or why not?

Sources: Based on D. Cardwell, “Competing with Prison Labor,” The New York Times, March 15, 2012, 1, 4.

case inciDent 1 Motivation for Leisure “When I have time I don’t have money. When I have money I don’t have time,” says Glenn Kelman, Redfin CEO. He’s not alone. While many workers find themselves faced with 60-, 70-, or 80-hour weeks (and sometimes more), others who are unemployed can find themselves with too much time on their hands. Take Dennis Lee, a sales associate working in Chicago whose girlfriend is unemployed. She has time to spare, but he says her unemployment makes it “financially impossible for me to support the both of us, even if we just go on a small trip, like, to Wisconsin and get a small hotel and stay for a couple of days.”

Those who are employed and who may have the financial means to take a vacation often leave those vacation days on the table. The average U.S. worker gets 2.6 weeks of vacation a year, yet only 43 percent take that time. Although the reasons U.S. employees may not be motivated to take their vacation time vary from a sense of job insecurity to heavy employer workload demands, some companies now let employees trade vacation days for cash, essentially motivating them to sell the vacation hours they do not intend to use.

The challenge of taking leisure time does not seem to be a problem for many European countries. Take the French, who get 30 days of vacation and say they take all of them. In fact, if you work in the European Union and get sick on vacation, the European Court of Justice says you are entitled to take a make-up vacation.

Questions 8-14. Do you think U.S. workers are less motivated by

vacation time than workers in other countries? Why or why not?

8-15. Why do you think U.S. workers often do not take all their allotted vacation time, even if they may lose the benefit? Are these personal choices, or are they driven by society, or by organizational culture?

8-16. If many unemployed are spending around 2 hours/day looking for work as some research indicates, how would you evaluate the impact of unemployment on work motivation? How would you spend your days if unemployed?

Sources: P. Coy, “The Leisure Gap,” Bloomberg Businessweek ( July 23–29, 2012): 8–10; A. B. Krueger and A. I. Mueller, “Time Use, Emotional Well-Being, and Unemployment: Evidence from Longitu- dinal Data,” American Economic Review (May 2012): 594–99; and L. Kwoh, “More Firms Offer Option to Swap Cash for Time,” The Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2012, B6.

case inciDent 2 Pay Raises Every Day How do you feel when you get a raise? Happy? Rewarded? Motivated to work harder for that next raise? The hope of an increase in pay, followed by a raise, can increase employee motivation. However, the effect may not last. In fact, the “warm fuzzies” from a raise last less than a month, according to a recent study. If raises are distributed annu- ally, performance motivation can dip for many months in between evaluations.

Some organizations have tried to keep the motivation going by increasing the frequency of raises. Currently, only

about 5 percent of organizations give raises more than annually, but some larger employers like discount web- site retailer Zulily, Inc., assess pay quarterly. Zulily CEO Darrell Cavens would like to do so even more frequently. “If it wasn’t a big burden, you’d almost want to work on it on a weekly basis,” he said. That’s because raises increase employee focus, happiness, engagement, and retention.

CEO Jeffrey Housenbold of online photo publisher Shutterfly, Inc., also advocates frequent pay assessments, but for a different reason. The company gives bonuses

270 PART 2 The Individual

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

8-20. In regard to Case Incident 1, what cultural differences in collectivism/individualism might help predict motivation for the amount of vacation employees want to accrue and will take annually?

8-21. How would you design a bonus/reward program to avoid the problems mentioned in Case Incident 2? 8-22. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

Sources: R. Feintzeig, “When the Annual Raise Isn’t Enough,” The Wall Street Journal, July 16, 2014, B1, B5; J. C. Marr and S. Thau, “Falling from Great (and Not-So-Great) Heights: How Initial Status Position Influences Performance after Status Loss,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 1 (2014): 223–48; and “Pay Equity & Discrimination,” IWPR, http://www.iwpr.org/initiatives/pay-equity-and- discrimination.

enDnOtes 1C. B. Gibson, J. L. Gibbs, T. L. Stanko, P. Tesluk, and S. G. Cohen, “Including the ‘I’ in Virtuality and Modern Job Design: Extending the Job Characteristics Model to Include the Moderating Effect of Individual Experiences of Electronic Dependence and Copresence,” Organization Science 22, no. 6 (2011): 1481–99. 2S. E. Humphrey, J. D. Nahrgang, and F. P. Morgeson, “Integrating Motivational, Social, and Contextual Work Design Features: A Meta-Analytic Summary and Theoretical

Extension of the Work Design Literature,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 5 (2007): 1332–56. 3B. M. Meglino and A. M. Korsgaard, “The Role of Other Orientation in Reactions to Job Characteristics,” Journal of Management 33, no. 1 (2007): 57–83. 4J. L. Pierce, I. Jussila, and A. Cummings, “Psychological Ownership within the Job Design Context: Revision of the Job Characteristics Model,” Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior 30, no. 4 (2009): 477–96.

5C. B. Gibson, J. L. Gibbs, T. L. Stanko, P. Tesluk, and S. G. Cohen, “Including the ‘I’ in Virtuality and Modern Job Design: Extending the Job Characteristics Model to Include the Moderating Effect of Individual Experiences of Electronic Dependence and Copresence.” 6B. M. Naba and L. Fan, “Employee Motiva- tion and Satisfaction in Niger: An Application of the Job Characteristics Model.” In A. de Hoyos, K. Kaminishi, and G. Duysters (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Innovation and Management (2013): 523–27.

four times a year to supplement its biannual raise structure as part of a review of employee concerns. “You can resolve problems early versus letting them fester,” he said. An- other reason is to increase feedback. Phone app designer Solstice Mobile gives promotions and salary increases six times a year; with this structure, Kelly O’Reagan climbed from $10/hour to $47.50/hour in 4 years. The company’s CEO, John Schwan, said that young workers are especially motivated by the near-constant feedback. O’Reagan said, “Seeing that increase was like, ‘Wow, this is quite different than what I had ever dreamed of.’”

You might be wondering how organizations can keep the dollar increases to employees flowing. Organizations are wondering, too. One tactic is to start employees at a low pay rate. Ensilon, a marketing services company, has coupled low starting salaries with twice-yearly salary re- views. Initial job candidates are skeptical, but most of the new hires earn at least 20 percent more after 2 years than they would with a typical annual raise structure.

No one is saying frequent pay raises are cheap, or easy to administrate. Pay itself is a complex issue, and

maintaining pay equity adds another level of difficulty. Frequent pay reviews are motivating, but only for the people receiving them—for the others, it’s a struggle to stay engaged. If a person has a track record of raises and then pay levels off, it can feel like a loss of identity as a strong performer rather than a natural consequence of achieving a higher level of pay. The frustration can lead to lower performance and increased turnover for high performers. CEO Schwan acknowledged, “It’s definitely a risk.”

Questions 8-17. Do you think frequent, small raises versus annual,

larger raises is more motivating? Why or why not? 8-18. Do you think you would personally be more moti-

vated by more frequent raises or by performance bonuses if the annual amounts were the same?

8-19. Annual pay raises in the United States are expected to be around 3 percent in the next few years. Do you think this percentage is motivating to employees? Why or why not?

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 271

7M. F. Peterson and S. A. Ruiz-Quintanilla, “Cultural Socialization as a Source of Intrinsic Work Motivation,” Group & Organization Man- agement 28, no. 2 (2003): 188–216. 8T. Silver, “Rotate Your Way to Higher Value,” Baseline (March/April 2010): 12; and J. J. Salopek, “Coca-Cola Division Refreshes Its Talent with Diversity Push on Campus,” Workforce Management Online, March 2011, www.workforce.com. 9Skytrax website review of Singapore Airlines, www.airlinequality.com/Airlines/SQ.htm, accessed May 31, 2013. 10S.-Y. Chen, W.-C. Wu, C.-S. Chang, and C.-T. Lin, “Job Rotation and Internal Marketing for Increased Job Satisfaction and Organisational Commitment in Hospital Nursing Staff,” Journal of Nursing Management 23, no. 3 (2015): 297–306. 11A. Christini and D. Pozzoli, “Workplace Practices and Firm Performance in Manu- facturing: A Comparative Study of Italy and Britain,” International Journal of Manpower 31, no. 7 (2010): 818–42; and K. Kaymaz, “The Ef- fects of Job Rotation Practices on Motivation: A Research on Managers in the Automotive Organizations,” Business and Economics Research Journal 1, no. 3 (2010): 69–86. 12S.-H. Huang and Y.-C. Pan, “Ergonomic Job Rotation Strategy Based on an Automated RGB-D Anthropometric Measuring System,” Journal of Manufacturing Systems 33, no. 4 (2014): 699–710; and P. C. Leider, J. S. Boschman, M. H. W. Frings-Dresen, et al., “Effects of Job Rotation on Musculoskeletal Complaints and Related Work Exposures: A Systematic Literature Review,” Ergonomics 58, no. 1 (2015): 18–32. 13A. M. Grant, “Leading with Meaning: Beneficiary Contact, Prosocial Impact, and the Performance Effects of Transformational Leadership,” Academy of Management Journal 55 (2012): 458–76; and A. M. Grant and S. K. Parker, “Redesigning Work Design Theories: The Rise of Relational and Proactive Perspec- tives,” Annals of the Academy of Management 3, no. 1 (2009): 317–75. 14J. Devaro, “A Theoretical Analysis of Rela- tional Job Design and Compensation,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 31 (2010): 279–301. 15A. M. Grant, E. M. Campbell, G. Chen, K. Cottone, D. Lapedis, and K. Lee, “Impact and the Art of Motivation Maintenance: The Effects of Contact with Beneficiaries on Persistence Behavior,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103, no. 1 (2007): 53–67. 16Y. N. Turner, I. Hadas-Halperin, and D. Raveh, “Patient Photos Spur Radiologist Empathy and Eye for Detail.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, November 2008. 17A. M. Grant, “The Significance of Task Sig- nificance: Job Performance Effects, Relational Mechanisms, and Boundary Conditions,” Jour- nal of Applied Psychology no. 93 (2008): 108–24.

18K. Pajo and L. Lee, “Corporate-Sponsored Volunteering: A Work Design Perspective,” Journal of Business Ethics 99, no. 3 (2011): 467–82. 19K. Bal, “Does Flextime Penalize Night Owls?” Human Resource Executive, June 23, 2014, http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/view/ story.jhtml?id=534357257. 20T. Kato, “Work and Family Practices in Japa- nese Firms: Their Scope, Nature, and Impact on Employee Turnover,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 20, no. 2 (2009): 439–56; and P. Mourdoukoutas, “Why Do Women Fare Better in the German World of Work Than in the US?” Forbes, March 25, 2013, www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/ 2013/03/25/why-do-women-fare-better-in-the- german-world-of-work-than-in-the-us/. 21R. Waring, “Sunday Dialogue: Flexible Work Hours,” The New York Times, January 19, 2013, www.nytimes.com. 22S. Y. He, “Does Flextime Affect Choice of Departure Time for Morning Home-Based Commuting Trips? Evidence from Two Re- gions in California,” Transport Policy 25 (2013): 210–21. 23S. Westcott, “Beyond Flextime: Trashing the Workweek,” Inc. (August 2008): 30. 24B. Y. Lee and S. E. DeVoe, “Flextime and Profitability,” Industrial Relations 51, no. 2 (2012): 298–316. 25See, for example, K. M. Shockley, and T. D. Allen, “When Flexibility Helps: Another Look at the Availability of Flexible Work Arrangements and Work–Family Conflict,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 71, no. 3 (2007): 479–93; J. G. Grzywacz, D. S. Carlson, and S. Shulkin, “Schedule Flexibility and Stress: Linking Formal Flexible Arrangements and Perceived Flexibility to Employee Health,” Community, Work, and Family 11, no. 2 (2008): 199–214; and L. A. McNall, A. D. Masuda, and J. M. Nicklin “Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intentions: The Mediating Role of Work-to-Family Enrichment,” Journal of Psychology 144, no. 1 (2010): 61–81. 26K. M. Shockley and T. D. Allen, “Investi- gating the Missing Link in Flexible Work Arrangement Utilization: An Individual Differ- ence Perspective,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 76, no. 1 (2010): 131–42. 27C. L. Munsch, C. L. Ridgeway, and J. C. Williams, “Pluralistic Ignorance and the Flexibility Bias: Understanding and Mitigating Flextime and Flexplace Bias at Work,” Work and Occupations 41, no. 1 (2014): 40–62. 28D. Eldridge and T. M. Nisar, “Employee and Organizational Impacts of Flextime Work Arrangements,” Industrial Relations 66, no. 2 (2011): 213–34. 29J. LaReau, “Ford’s 2 Julies Share Devo- tion—and Job,” Automotive News (October 25, 2010): 4. 30S. Adams, “Workers Have More Flextime, Less Real Flexibility, Study Shows,” Forbes,

May 2, 2014, http://www.forbes.com/sites/ susanadams/2014/05/02/workers-have-more- flextime-less-real-flexibility-study-shows/. 31C. B. Mulligan, “What Job Sharing Brings,” Forbes, May 8, 2013, http://economix.blogs .nytimes.com/2013/05/08/what-job-sharing- brings/; and “The Employer Mandate/ Employer Penalty Delayed until 2015/2016,” http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare- employer-mandate/. 32L. Woellert, “U.S. Work Share Program Helps Employers Avoid Layoffs,” Bloom- berg Businessweek, January 24, 2013, www .businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-24/ u-dot-s-dot-work-share-program-helps- employers-avoid-layoffs. 33P. R. Gregory, “Why Obama Cannot Match Germany’s Jobs Miracle,” Forbes, May 5, 2013, www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/ 2013/05/05/why-obama-cannot-match- germanys-jobs-miracle/. 34See, for example, E. J. Hill, M. Ferris, and V. Martinson, “Does It Matter Where You Work? A Comparison of How Three Work Venues (Traditional Office, Virtual Office, and Home Office) Influence Aspects of Work and Personal/Family Life,” Journal of Vocational Be- havior 63, no. 2 (2003): 220–41; B. Williamson, “Managing Virtual Workers,” Bloomberg Busi- nessweek, July 16, 2009, www.businessweek.com; and B. A. Lautsch and E. E. Kossek, “Manag- ing a Blended Workforce: Telecommuters and Non-Telecommuters,” Organizational Dynamics 40, no. 1 (2010): 10–17. 35B. Belton, “Best Buy Copies Yahoo, Reins in Telecommuting,” USA Today, March 6, 2013, www.usatoday.com. 36C. Tkaczyk, “Marissa Mayer Breaks Her Silence on Yahoo’s Telecommuting Policy,” Fortune, April 13, 2013, http://fortune .com/2013/04/19/marissa-mayer-breaks-her- silence-on-yahoos-telecommuting-policy/. 37D. Wilkie, “Has the Telecommuting Bubble Burst?” Society for Human Resource Management, June 1, 2015, http://www.shrm.org/publications/ hrmagazine/editorialcontent/2015/0615/ pages/0615-telecommuting.aspx. 38B. W. Reynolds, “100 Top Companies with Remote Jobs in 2015,” Flexjobs, January 20, 2015, http://www.flexjobs.com/blog/ post/100-top-companies-with-remote-jobs- in-2015. 39S. Florentine, “10 Most Telecommuting- Friendly Tech Companies,” CIO, January 15, 2014, http://www.cio.com/article/2369810/ telecommuting/136064-10-Most-Telecommuting- Friendly-Tech-Companies .html#slide11. 40See, for instance, M. Conlin, “The Easiest Commute of All,” BusinessWeek (December 12, 2005): 78; S. Shellenbarger, “Telework Is on the Rise, but It Isn’t Just Done from Home Anymore,” The Wall Street Journal, January 23, 2001, B1; and E. O’Keefe, “Teleworking Grows but Still a Rarity,” The Washington Post, February 22, 2011, B3.

272 PART 2 The Individual

41S. Raghuram and D. Fang, “Telecommuting and the Role of Supervisory Power in China,” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 31, no. 2 (2014): 523–47. 42E. E. Kossek, B. A. Lautsch, and S. C. Eaton, “Telecommuting, Control, and Boundary Management: Correlates of Policy Use and Practice, Job Control, and Work-Family Effec- tiveness,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 68, no. 2 (2006): 347–67. 43J. Kotkin, “Marissa Mayer’s Misstep and the Unstoppable Rise of Telecommuting,” Forbes, March 26, 2013. 44L. Taskin and F. Bridoux, “Telework: A Challenge to Knowledge Transfer in Organiza- tions,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 21, no. 13 (2010): 2503–20. 45S. M. B. Thatcher and J. Bagger, “Working in Pajamas: Telecommuting, Unfairness Sources, and Unfairness Perceptions,” Negotiation and Conflict Management Research 4, no. 3 (2011): 248–76. 46E. G. Dutcher, “The Effects of Telecommut- ing on Productivity: An Experimental Exami- nation. The Role of Dull and Creative Tasks,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 84, no. 1 (2014): 355–63. 47See, for example, P. Brotherton, “For Teleworkers, Less Is Definitely More,” T1D 65 (March 2011): 29; and M. Virick, N. DaSilva, and K. Arrington, “Moderators of the Curvi- linear Relation between Extent of Telecom- muting and Job and Life Satisfaction: The Role of Performance Outcome Orientation and Worker Type,” Human Relations 63, no. 1 (2010): 137–54. 48M. C. Noonan and J. L. Glass, “The Hard Truth about Telecommuting,” Monthly Labor Review (2012): 1459–78. 49J. Welch and S. Welch, “The Importance of Being There,” BusinessWeek, April 16, 2007, 92; Z. I. Barsness, K. A. Diekmann, and M. L. Se- idel, “Motivation and Opportunity: The Role of Remote Work, Demographic Dissimilarity, and Social Network Centrality in Impression Management,” Academy of Management Journal 48, no. 3 (2005): 401–19. 50P. Zhu and S. G. Mason, “The Impact of Telecommuting on Personal Vehicle Usage and Environmental Sustainability,” Interna- tional Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 11, no. 8 (2014): 2185–200. 51S. Raghuram and D. Fang, “Telecommuting and the Role of Supervisory Power in China.” 52M. Marchington, “Analysing the Forces Shaping Employee Involvement and Participa- tion (EIP) at Organisation Level in Liberal Market Economies (LMEs),” Human Resource Management Journal 25, no. 1 (2015): 1–18. 53See, for example, the literature on empow- erment, such as D. P. Ashmos, D. Duchon, R. R. McDaniel Jr., and J. W. Huonker, “What a Mess! Participation as a Simple Managerial Rule to ‘Complexify’ Organizations,” Journal of Management Studies 39, no. 2 (2002): 189–206; S. E. Seibert, S. R. Silver, and W. A. Randolph,

“Taking Empowerment to the Next Level: A Multiple-Level Model of Empowerment, Performance, and Satisfaction,” Academy of Management Journal 47, no. 3 (2004): 332–49; M. M. Butts, R. J. Vandenberg, D. M. DeJoy, B. S. Schaffer, and M. G. Wilson, “Individual Reactions to High Involvement Work Pro- cesses: Investigating the Role of Empower- ment and Perceived Organizational Support,” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 14, no. 2 (2009): 122–36; R. Park, E. Applebaum, and D. Kruse, “Employee Involvement and Group Incentives in Manufacturing Companies: A Multi-Level Analysis,” Human Resource Manage- ment Journal 20, no. 3 (2010): 227–43; D. C. Jones, P. Kalmi, and A. Kauhanen, “How Does Employee Involvement Stack Up? The Effects of Human Resource Management Policies in a Retail Firm,” Industrial Relations 49, no. 1 (2010): 1–21; and M. T. Maynard, L. L. Gilson, and J. E. Mathieu, “Empowerment—Fad or Fab? A Multilevel Review of the Past Two Decades of Research,” Journal of Management 38, no. 4 (2012): 1231–81. 54See, for instance, A. Sagie and Z. Aycan, “A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Participative Decision-Making in Organizations,” Human Relations 56, no. 4 (2003): 453–73; and J. Brockner, “Unpacking Country Effects: On the Need to Operationalize the Psychologi- cal Determinants of Cross-National Differ- ences,” in R. M. Kramer and B. M. Staw (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 25 (Oxford, UK: Elsevier, 2003), 336–40. 55C. Robert, T. M. Probst, J. J. Martocchio, R. Drasgow, and J. J. Lawler, “Empowerment and Continuous Improvement in the United States, Mexico, Poland, and India: Predicting Fit on the Basis of the Dimensions of Power Distance and Individualism,” Journal of Applied Psychology 85, no. 5 (2000): 643–58. 56Z. X. Chen and S. Aryee, “Delegation and Employee Work Outcomes: An Examina- tion of the Cultural Context of Mediating Processes in China,” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 1 (2007): 226–38. 57G. Huang, X. Niu, C. Lee, and S. J. Ashford, “Differentiating Cognitive and Affective Job Insecurity: Antecedents and Outcomes,” Jour- nal of Organizational Behavior 33, no. 6 (2012): 752–69. 58Z. Cheng, “The Effects of Employee Involve- ment and Participation on Subjective Wellbe- ing: Evidence from Urban China,” Social Indicators Research 118, no. 2 (2014): 457–83. 59M. Marchington, “Analysing the Forces Shaping Employee Involvement and Participa- tion (EIP) at Organisation Level in Liberal Market Economies (LMEs).” 60J. J. Caughron and M. D. Mumford, “Embed- ded Leadership: How Do a Leader’s Superiors Impact Middle-Management Performance?” Leadership Quarterly (June 2012): 342–53. 61See, for instance, A. Pendleton and A. Rob- inson, “Employee Stock Ownership, Involve- ment, and Productivity: An Interaction-Based

Approach,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 64, no. 1 (2010): 3–29. 62D. K. Datta, J. P. Guthrie, and P. M. Wright, “Human Resource Management and Labor Productivity: Does Industry Matter? Academy of Management Journal 48, no. 1 (2005): 135–45; C. M. Riordan, R. J. Vandenberg, and H. A. Richardson, “Employee Involvement Climate and Organizational Effectiveness.” Human Resource Management 44, no. 4 (2005): 471–88; and J. Kim, J. P. MacDuffie, and F. K. Pil, “Employee Voice and Organizational Performance: Team versus Representative Influence,” Human Relations 63, no. 3 (2010): 371–94. 63M. Marchington, “Analysing the Forces Shaping Employee Involvement and Participa- tion (EIP) at Organisation Level in Liberal Market Economies (LMEs).” 64E. White, “Opportunity Knocks, and It Pays a Lot Better,” The Wall Street Journal, Novem- ber 13, 2006, B3. 65D. A. McIntyre and S. Weigley, “8 companies That Most Owe Workers a Raise,” USA Today, May 13, 2013, www.usatoday.com/story/ money/business/2013/05/12/8-companies- that-most-owe-workers-a-raise/2144013/. 66M. Sabramony, N. Krause, J. Norton, and G. N. Burns “The Relationship between Human Resource Investments and Organiza- tional Performance: A Firm-Level Examina- tion of Equilibrium Theory,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 4 (2008): 778–88. 67C. Isidore, “Walmart Ups Pay Well above Minimum Wage,” CNN Money, February 19, 2015, http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/19/ news/companies/walmart-wages/. 68See, for example, B. Martinez, “Teacher Bonuses Emerge in Newark,” The Wall Street Journal, April 21, 2011, A15; K. Taylor, “Dif- fering Results When Teacher Evaluations Are Tied to Test Scores,” The New York Times, March 23, 2015, A16; and D. Weber, “Seminole Teachers to Get Bonuses Instead of Raises,” Orlando Sentinel, January 19, 2011, www .orlandosentinel.com. 69See, for example, M. Damiani and A. Ricci, “Managers’ Education and the Choice of Dif- ferent Variable Pay Schemes: Evidence from Italian Firms,” European Management Journal 32, no. 6 (2014): 891–902; and J. S. Heywood and U. Jirjahn, “Variable Pay, Industrial Rela- tions and Foreign Ownership: Evidence from Germany,” British Journal of Industrial Relations 52, no. 3 (2014): 521–52. 70S. Miller, “Variable Pay Spending Spikes to Record High,” Society for Human Resource Man- agement, September 2, 2014, http://www.shrm .org/hrdisciplines/compensation/articles/ pages/variable-pay-high.aspx. 71S. Miller, “Companies Worldwide Reward- ing Performance with Variable Pay,” Society for Human Resource Management, March 1, 2010, www.shrm.org. 72S. Miller, “Asian Firms Offer More Variable Pay Than Western Firms,” Society for Human

Motivation: From Concepts to Applications CHAPTER 8 273

Resource Management, March 28, 2012, www .shrm.org. 73H. Kim, K. L. Sutton, and Y. Gong, “Group- Based Pay-for-Performance Plans and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Em- powerment Practices,” Asia Pacific Journal of Management (March 2013): 31–52. 74J. Cloutier, D. Morin, and S. Renaud, “How Does Variable Pay Relate to Pay Satisfaction among Canadian Workers?” International Jour- nal of Manpower 34, no. 5 (2013): 465–85. 75E. Belogolovsky and P. A. Bamberger, “Sig- naling in Secret: Pay for Performance and the Incentive and Sorting Effects of Pay Secrecy,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 6 (2014): 1706–33. 76Ibid. 77B. Wysocki Jr., “Chilling Reality Awaits Even the Employed,” The Wall Street Journal, November 5, 2001, A1; and J. C. Kovac, “Sour Economy Presents Compensation Challeng- es,” Employee Benefit News, July 1, 2008, 18. 78K. A. Bender, C. P. Green, and J. S. Hey- wood, “Piece Rates and Workplace Injury: Does Survey Evidence Support Adam Smith?” Journal of Population Economics 25, no. 2 (2012): 569–90. 79J. S. Heywood, X. Wei, and G. Ye, “Piece Rates for Professors,” Economics Letters 113, no. 3 (2011): 285–87. 80A. Baker and V. Mertins, “Risk-Sorting and Preference for Team Piece Rates,” Journal of Economic Psychology 34 (2013): 285–300. 81A. Clemens, “Pace of Work and Piece Rates,’ Economics Letters 115, no. 3 (2012): 477–79. 82K. A. Bender, C. P. Green, and J. S. Hey- wood, “Piece Rates and Workplace Injury: Does Survey Evidence Support Adam Smith?” 83S. L. Rynes, B. Gerhart, and L. Parks, “Per- sonnel Psychology: Performance Evaluation and Pay for Performance,” Annual Review of Psychology 56, no. 1 (2005): 571–600. 84K. Zernike, “Newark Teachers Approve a Contract with Merit Pay,” The New York Times, November 14, 2012, www.nytimes.com/. 85“Paying Doctors for Performance,” The New York Times, January 27, 2013, A16. 86S. Halzack, “Companies Look to Bonuses Instead of Salary Increases in an Uncertain Economy,” Washington Post, November 6, 2012, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/. 87C. M. Barnes, J. Reb, and D. Ang, “More Than Just the Mean: Moving to a Dynamic View of Performance-Based Compensation,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 3 (2012): 711–18. 88E. J. Castillo, “Gender, Race, and the New (Merit-Based) Employment Relationship,” Industrial Relations 51, no. S1 (2012): 528–62. 89P. Furman, “Ouch! Top Honchos on Wall Street See Biggest Cuts to Bonuses,” New York Daily News, February 18, 2013, www .nydailynews.com.

90N. Chun and S. Lee, “Bonus Compen- sation and Productivity: Evidence from Indian Manufacturing Plant-Level Data,” Journal of Productivity Analysis 43, no. 1 (2015): 47–58. 91E. White, “Employers Increasingly Favor Bonuses to Raises,” The Wall Street Jour- nal, August 28, 2006, B3; and J. S. Lublin, “Boards Tie CEO Pay More Tightly to Perfor- mance,” The Wall Street Journal, February 21, 2006, A1, A14. 92S. S. Wiltermuth and F. Gino, “‘I’ll Have One of Each’: How Separating Rewards into (Meaningless) Categories Increases Motiva- tion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (January 2013): 1–13. 93“Mark Zuckerberg Reaped $2.3 Billion on Facebook Stock Options,” Huffington Post, April 26, 2013, www.huffingtonpost.com. 94D. D’Art and T. Turner, “Profit Sharing, Firm Performance, and Union Influence in Selected European Countries,” Personnel Review 33, no. 3 (2004): 335–50; and D. Kruse, R. Freeman, and J. Blasi, Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Shar- ing, and Broad-Based Stock Options (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010). 95A. Bayo-Moriones and M. Larraza-Kintana, “Profit-Sharing Plans and Affective Commit- ment: Does the Context Matter?” Human Resource Management 48, no. 2 (2009): 207–26. 96N. Chi and T. Han, “Exploring the Linkages between Formal Ownership and Psychological Ownership for the Organization: The Mediat- ing Role of Organizational Justice,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 81, no. 4 (2008): 691–711. 97J. H. Han, K. M. Barol, and S. Kim, “Tight- ening Up the Performance-Pay Linkage: Roles of Contingent Reward Leadership and Profit-Sharing in the Cross-Level Influence of Individual Pay-for-Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 2 (2015): 417–30. 98R. P. Garrett, “Does Employee Ownership Increase Innovation?” New England Journal of Entrepreneurship 13, no. 2, (2010): 37–46. 99D. McCarthy, E. Reeves, and T. Turner, “Can Employee Share-Ownership Improve Employee Attitudes and Behaviour?” Employee Relations 32, no. 4 (2010): 382–95. 100A. Pendleton, “Shared Capitalism at Work: Employee Ownership, Profit and Gain Sharing, and Broad-Based Stock Options,” Industrial & Labor Relations Review 64, no. 3 (2011): 621–22. 101A. Pendleton and A. Robinson, “Employee Stock Ownership, Involvement, and Productiv- ity: An Interaction-Based Approach,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 64, no. 1 (2010): 3–29. 102X. Zhang, K. M. Bartol, K. G. Smith, M. D. Pfarrer, and D. M. Khanin, “CEOs on

the Edge: Earnings Manipulation and Stock- Based Incentive Misalignment,” Academy of Management Journal 51, no. 2 (2008): 241–58. 103C. B. Cadsby, F. Song, and F. Tapon, “Sorting and Incentive Effects of Pay for Performance: An Experimental Investiga- tion,” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 2 (2007): 387–405. 104J. H. Han, K. M. Barol, and S. Kim, “Tight- ening Up the Performance-Pay Linkage: Roles of Contingent Reward Leadership and Profit-Sharing in the Cross-Level Influence of Individual Pay-for-Performance.” 105Z. Lin, J. Kellly, and L. Trenberth, “Ante- cedents and Consequences of the Introduc- tion of Flexible Benefit Plans in China,” The International Journal of Human Resource Manage- ment vol. 22, no. 5 (2011): 1128–45. 106Ibid. 107R. C. Koo, “Global Added Value of Flexible Benefits,” Benefits Quarterly 27, no. 4 (2011): 17–20. 108P. Stephens, “Flex Plans Gain in Popular- ity,” CA Magazine, January/February 2010, 10. 109D. Lovewell, “Flexible Benefits: Benefits on Offer,” Employee Benefits, March 2010, S15. 110L. Shepherd, “Special Report on Rewards and Recognition: Getting Personal,” Workforce Management, September 2010, 24–29. 111www.globoforce.come/our-clients, accessed June 4, 2015. 112L. Shepherd, “On Recognition, Multina- tionals Think Globally,” Workforce Management, September 2010, 26. 113R. J. Long and J. L. Shields, “From Pay to Praise? Non-Case Employee Recognition in Canadian and Australian Firms,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 21, no. 8 (2010): 1145–72. 114S. E. Markham, K. D. Scott, and G. H. McKee, “Recognizing Good Attendance: A Longitudinal, Quasi-Experimental Field Study,” Personnel Psychology 55, no. 3 (2002): 641; and S. J. Peterson and F. Luthans, “The Impact of Financial and Nonfinancial Incen- tives on Business Unit Outcomes over Time,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 1 (2006): 156–65. 115C. Xu and C. Liang, “The Mechanisms Un- derlying an Employee Recognition Program,” in L. Hale and J. Zhang (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Public Human Resource Management and Innovation (2013): 28–35. 116A. D. Stajkovic and F. Luthans, “Differen- tial Effects of Incentive Motivators on Work Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 4, no. 3 (2001): 587. See also F. Luthans and A. D. Stajkovic, “Provide Recognition for Performance Improvement,” in E. A. Locke (ed.), Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004), 166–80.

S ou

rc e:

H an

do ut

/R eu

te rs

Foundations of Group Behavior9

274

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 275

Crushed by the herd

Answer quickly: If you were an employee of this car’s manufacturer and could have prevented the accident that killed two people and injured a third, would you?

No doubt you answered “yes” automatically, but if we took

a few minutes to think about it, we might have to honestly

answer “maybe.” When we are members of groups as power-

ful as those in General Motors (GM), it can be very difficult

to predict our behavior. Our perceptions of right and wrong can become skewed, making even straightforward ethical

decisions like this one confusing.

Courtland Kelley of GM (which made the Chevrolet Cobalt

in the photo) learned firsthand the pressures groups can exert

on an individual. As the leader of GM’s U.S. safety inspection

program, he expected his workgroups to act upon the seri-

ous safety flaws he found in the vehicle. Instead, “Group after

group and committee after committee within GM that reviewed the issue failed to take action or acted too slowly,” a later

report noted. Kelley’s colleague, auditor William McAleer, agreed that man-

agement refused to acknowledge safety issues with vehicles. “Any time

you had a problem, you ran into resistance,” he said. “Nobody owns [the]

defect. And the plant can say, ‘It was working when it left here.’ And the

supplier can say, ‘My part was good.’ It relieves everybody of responsibility.”

9-1 Distinguish between the different types of groups.

9-2 Describe the punctuated-equilibrium model of group development.

9-3 Show how role requirements change in different situations.

9-4 Demonstrate how norms exert influence on an individual’s behavior.

9-5 Show how status and size differences affect group performance.

9-6 Describe how issues of cohesiveness and diversity can be integrated for group effectiveness.

9-7 Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of group decision making.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

276 PART 3 The Group

When Kelley pushed harder to have the Cobalt’s faulty ignition switch

addressed, management actively discouraged his efforts. The group or-

dered him to stay quiet about defects and rename them as mere conve-

nience issues. At one point, his direct supervisor forbade him to share

data on serious defects with McAleer and threatened to transfer him to

a lesser position on the outskirts of town, while the management group

tried to stifle the information. Kelley said, “I heard them have many discus- sions about not wanting to notify the government, not putting voice mails

out to dealers, because the government could get them” and learn of the

defects.

When Kelley couldn’t be silenced, the group pressured him into toning

down the wording in his reports and shuffled him into less responsible jobs.

McAleer, who suffered similar circumstances until he was laid off in 2004,

observed, “The system acts as if raising a safety issue internally were an

act of corporate treason.” Kelley landed off the organization chart in a “spe-

cial assignment job,” where he was told to “come up with charts, predict warranty for the vehicle, but not find every problem that GM might have.”

McAleer said of Kelley, “He still has a job—he doesn’t have a career. He

has no possibility of promotion.” Kelley was not fired likely only because he

brought lawsuits against GM.

On the positive side, Kelley’s efforts have doubtlessly saved lives. After

13 deaths and 54 crashes, 2,084,000 Cobalts were recalled, as were

almost 70,000 other vehicles with defects he found. From this standpoint, the battle he fought and his years in a “GM purgatory” job have been worth

it. “I felt morally responsible to fix a problem that I found in a vehicle,” he

said of his work on the Chevy Trailblazer. However, his heroic efforts have

cost him many court battles, and he has developed chest pains, panic at-

tacks, depression, and insomnia. “I clearly saw him age drastically,” his doc-

tor, Van Alstine, said. “You just knew he was under a tremendous amount of

stress. . . . It shook him to the core.”

Sources: G. Gutierrez and R. Gardella, “‘Willful Ignorance’ Ex-Auditor Blasts GM for Cutting Safety Program,” NBC News, July 9, 2014, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/gm-recall/ willful-ignorance-ex-auditor-blasts-gm-cutting-safety-program-n152311; T. Higgins and N. Summers, “If Only They Had Listened,” Bloomberg Businessweek, June 2014, 48–53; and S. McEachern, “General Motors ‘Whistleblower’ Was Told to Back Off after Finding Safety Flaws,” GM Authority, June 19, 2014, http://gmauthority.com/blog/2014/06/general- motors-whistleblower-was-told-to-back-off-after-finding-safety-flaws/.

The story of Courtland Kelley’s attempts to counter the effects of group pressure provides us with a powerful example of the ways groups can (mis)behave. Even though Kelley resisted for all the right ethical reasons, sometimes countering group pressure can mean costly consequences for the individual, as he found.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 277

Groups have their place—and their pitfalls. Some groups can exert a powerful positive influence, and others can be tragically negative. The objec- tives of this chapter and Chapter 10 are to familiarize you with group and team concepts, provide you with a foundation for understanding how groups and teams work, and show you how to create effective working units. Let’s begin by defining a group.

Defining and Classifying Groups In organizational behavior, a group is two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives. Groups can be either formal or informal. A formal group is defined by the orga- nization’s structure, with designated work assignments and established tasks. In formal groups, the behaviors team members should engage in are stipulated by and directed toward organizational goals. The six members of an airline flight crew are a formal group, for example. In contrast, an informal group is neither formally structured nor organizationally determined. Informal groups in the work environment meet the need for social contact. Three employees from dif- ferent departments who regularly have lunch or coffee together are an informal group. These types of interactions among individuals, though informal, deeply affect their behavior and performance.

social Identity People often feel strongly about their groups partly because, as research indi- cates, shared experiences amplify our perception of events.1 Also, according to research in Australia, sharing painful experiences, in particular, increases our felt bond and trust with others.2 Why do people form groups, and why do they feel so strongly about them? Consider the celebrations that follow when a sports team wins a national championship. The winner’s supporters are elated, and sales of team-related shirts, jackets, and hats skyrocket. Fans of the losing team feel dejected, even embarrassed. Why? Even though fans have little to do with the actual performance of the sports team, their self-image can be wrapped up in their identification with the group. Our tendency to personally invest in the accomplishments of a group is the territory of social identity theory.

9-1 Distinguish between the different types of groups. group Two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who have come together to achieve particular objectives.

informal group A group that is neither formally structured nor organizationally determined; such a group appears in response to the need for social contact.

formal group A designated workgroup defined by an organization’s structure.

social identity theory Perspective that considers when and why individuals consider themselves members of groups.

Jeffrey Webster, director of human resources at a Nissan plant in Mississippi, also serves as the director of the plant’s gospel choir. Choir members are a diverse group of employees who identify with each other as they all share a love of singing and performing for fellow workers, company executives, state officials, and community events. Source: Rogelio V. Solis/AP Images

278 PART 3 The Group

Social identity theory proposes that people have emotional reactions to the failure or success of their group because their self-esteem gets tied to what- ever happens to the group.3 When your group does well, you bask in reflected glory, and your own self-esteem rises. When your group does poorly, you might feel bad about yourself, or you might reject that part of your identity like “fair- weather fans.” Furthermore, if your group is devalued and disrespected, your social identity might feel threatened, and you might endorse deviant behaviors to “get even” and restore your group’s standing.4 Social identities can even lead people to experience pleasure as a result of seeing another group suffer. We often see these feelings of schadenfreude in the joy fans experience when a hated team loses.5

People develop many identities through the course of their lives. You might define yourself in terms of the organization you work for, the city you live in, your profession, your religious background, your ethnicity, and/or your gender. Over time, some groups you belong to may become more significant to you than others. A U.S. expatriate working in Rome might be very aware of being from the United States, for instance, but doesn’t give national identity a second thought when transferring from Tulsa to Tucson.6 We may thus pick and choose which of our social identities are salient to the situation, or we may find that our social identities are in conflict, such as the identities of business leader and parent.7

Our social identities help us understand who we are and where we fit in with other people, and research indicates they bring us better health and lower levels of depression because we become less likely to attribute negative situations to internal or insurmountable reasons.8 However, to experience these good out- comes, we need to feel our social identities are positive.9

Until now, we’ve discussed social identities primarily in a cultural context. However, the identity we may feel with respect to our organization is only one aspect of our work-related identities (see OB Poll). Within our organizations and workgroups, we can develop many identities through: (1) relational iden- tification, when we connect with others because of our roles, and (2) collective identification, when we connect with the aggregate characteristics of our groups.

Ob POLL Most People report Drinking with coworkers is acceptable

Note: Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) survey of 501 individuals and how drinking is viewed in their organization at a range of work-

related activities.

Source: Based on S. M. Heathfield, “To Drink or Not to Drink: Does Alcohol Drinking Mix Safely with Work Events?” About.com Guide, 2013, http://

humanresources.about.com/od/networking/qt/drink_i3.htm.

At a holiday party

At a meal with a client or customer

At a meal during a job interview

At a meal with coworkers

At the celebration of a company milestone

At a retirement party

70%

40% 32%

28%

22% 4% 14%

Never

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 279

Often, our identification with our workgroups is stronger than with our organi- zations, but both are important to positive outcomes in attitudes and behaviors. Additionally, if we have low identification in relation to the group, there may be increased among by group members. If we have low identification with our organizations, we may experience decreased satisfaction and engage in fewer organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs).10

Ingroups and Outgroups Ingroup favoritism occurs when we see members of our group as better than other people, and people not in our group as all the same. Recent research suggests that people with low openness and/or low agreeableness are more sus- ceptible to ingroup favoritism.11

Whenever there is an ingroup, there is by necessity an outgroup, which is sometimes everyone else, but is usually an identified group known by the ingroup’s members. For example, if my ingroup is the Republican party in U.S. politics, my outgroup might be anyone in the world who is not a Republican, but it’s more likely to be the other U.S. political parties, or perhaps just Democrats.

When there are ingroups and outgroups, there is often animosity between them. One of the most powerful sources of ingroup–outgroup feelings is the practice of religion, even in the workplace. One global study, for instance, found that when groups became heavily steeped in religious rituals and discussions, they became especially discriminatory toward outgroups and aggressive if the outgroups had more resources.12 Consider an example from another study of a U.K. Muslim organization that supported Al-Qaeda and identified moderate U.K. Muslims as its outgroup. The Al-Qaeda ingroup was not neutral toward the moderate outgroup; instead, the ingroup denounced the moderates, denigrat- ing them as deviant and threatening outward aggression.13

social Identity threat Ingroups and outgroups pave the way for social identity threat, which is akin to stereotype threat (see Chapter 6). With social identity threat, individuals believe they will be personally negatively evaluated due to their association with a deval- ued group, and they may lose confidence and performance effectiveness. One study found, for example, that when subjects from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds took a high-pressure math test, the low-status subjects who felt social identity threat could be as confident as the high-status subjects only when they were first deliberately encouraged about their abilities.14

Stages of Group Development

ingroup favoritism Perspective in which we see members of our ingroup as better than other people, and people not in our group as all the same.

9-2 Describe the punctuated-equilibrium model of group development.

Watch It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Witness.org: Managing Groups & Teams.

Temporary groups with finite deadlines pass through a unique sequencing of actions (or inaction): (1) Their first meeting sets the group’s direction, (2) the first phase of group activity is one of inertia and thus slower progress, (3) a transition takes place exactly when the group has used up half its allotted time, (4) this transition initiates major changes, (5) a second phase of inertia follows the transition, and (6) the group’s last meeting is characterized by markedly

outgroup The inverse of an ingroup, which can mean everyone outside the group, but more usually an identified other group.

280 PART 3 The Group

accelerated activity.15 This pattern, called the punctuated-equilibrium model, is shown in Exhibit 9-1.

Let’s discuss each stage of the model. At the first meeting, the group’s gen- eral purpose and direction is established, and then a framework of behavioral patterns and assumptions through which the group will approach its project emerges, sometimes in the first few seconds of the group’s existence. Once set, the group’s direction is solidified and is unlikely to be reexamined throughout the first half of its life. This is a period of inertia—the group tends to stand still or become locked into a fixed course of action even if it gains new insights that challenge initial patterns and assumptions.

One of the most interesting discoveries in studies was that groups experi- enced a transition precisely halfway between the first meeting and the official deadline—whether members spent an hour on their project or 6 months. The midpoint appears to work like an alarm clock, heightening members’ aware- ness that their time is limited and they need to get moving. This transition ends phase 1 and is characterized by a concentrated burst of changes, dropping of old patterns, and adoption of new perspectives. The transition sets a revised direction for phase 2, a new equilibrium or period of inertia in which the group executes plans created during the transition period.

The group’s last meeting is characterized by a final burst of activity to finish its work. In summary, the punctuated-equilibrium model characterizes groups as exhibiting long periods of inertia interspersed with brief revolutionary changes triggered primarily by members’ awareness of time and deadlines. This is not the only model of group stages by far, but it is a dominant theory with strong support. Keep in mind, however, that this model doesn’t apply to all groups but is suited to the finite quality of temporary task groups working under a time deadline.16

Group Property 1: Roles Workgroups shape members’ behavior, and they also help explain individual behavior as well as the performance of the group itself. Some defining group properties are roles, norms, status, size, cohesiveness, and diversity. We’ll discuss each in the sections that follow. Let’s begin with the first group property, roles.

Shakespeare said, “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.” Using the same metaphor, all group members are actors, each playing

punctuated-equilibrium model A set of phases that temporary groups go through that involves transitions between inertia and activity.

9-3 Show how role requirements change in different situations.

the Punctuated-equilibrium ModelExhibit 9-1

A

First Meeting

Phase 1

CompletionPhase 2

Transition

(High)

(Low) (A+B)/2 Time

Pe rfo

rm an

ce

B

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 281

a role, a set of expected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit. We are required to play a number of diverse roles, both on and off our jobs. As we’ll see, one of the tasks in understanding behav- ior is grasping the role a person is currently playing.

Bill is a plant manager with EMM Industries, a large electrical equipment manufacturer in Phoenix. He fulfills a number of roles—employee, member of middle management, and electrical engineer. Off the job, Bill holds more roles: husband, father, Catholic, tennis player, member of the Thunderbird Country Club, and president of his homeowners’ association. Many of these roles are compatible; some create conflicts. How does Bill’s religious commit- ment influence his managerial decisions regarding layoffs, expense padding, and provision of accurate information to government agencies? A recent offer of promotion requires Bill to relocate, yet his family wants to stay in Phoenix. Can the role demands of his job be reconciled with the demands of his husband and father roles?

Different groups impose different role requirements on individuals. Like Bill, we all play a number of roles, and our behavior varies with each. But how do we know each role’s requirements? We draw upon our role perceptions to frame our ideas of appropriate behaviors, and learn the expectations of our groups.

role Perception Our view of how we’re supposed to act in a given situation is a role perception. We get role perceptions from stimuli all around us—for example, friends, books, films, and television, as when we form an impression of politicians from House of Cards. Apprenticeship programs allow beginners to watch an expert so they can learn to act as they should.

role expectations Role expectations are the way others believe you should act in a given context. A U.S. federal judge is viewed as having propriety and dignity, while a football coach is seen as aggressive, dynamic, and inspiring to the players.

In the workplace, we look at role expectations through the perspective of the psychological contract: an unwritten agreement that exists between employees and employers. This agreement sets out mutual expectations.17 Management

role A set of expected behavior patterns attributed to someone occupying a given position in a social unit.

role perception An individual’s view of how he or she is supposed to act in a given situation.

role expectations How others believe a person should act in a given situation.

psychological contract An unwritten agreement that sets out what management expects from an employee and vice versa.

Les Hatton, manager of a Recreational Equipment, Inc., store in Manhattan, pumps up employees before the store’s grand opening. Part of the psychological contract between REI and its employees is the expectation that salespeople will display enthusiasm and generate excite- ment while welcoming and serving customers. Source: Matt Payton/AP Images

282 PART 3 The Group

is expected to treat employees justly, provide acceptable working conditions, clearly communicate what is a fair day’s work, and give feedback on how well an employee is doing. Employees are expected to demonstrate a good attitude, follow directions, and show loyalty to the organization.

What happens if management is derelict in its part of the bargain? We can expect negative effects on employee performance and satisfaction. One study among restaurant managers found that violations of the psychological contract were related to greater intentions to quit, while another study of a variety of dif- ferent industries found psychological contracts were associated with lower levels of productivity, higher levels of theft, and greater work withdrawal.18

There is evidence that perceptions of psychological contracts vary across cultures. In France, where people are individualistic and power is more asym- metric, contracts are perceived as self-interested yet favoring the more powerful party. In Canada, where people are individualistic but power is more symmetric, contracts are perceived as self-interested yet focused on balanced reciprocity. In China, where people are collectivistic and power is more asymmetric, contracts are perceived as going beyond the work context into employees’ lives. And in Norway, where people are collectivistic but power is more symmetric, contracts are perceived as more relational and based on trust.19

role Conflict When compliance with one role requirement may make it difficult to comply with another, the result is role conflict.20 At the extreme, two or more role ex- pectations may be contradictory. For example, if as a manager you were to pro- vide a performance evaluation of a person you mentored, your roles as evalua- tor and mentor may conflict. Similarly, we can experience interrole conflict21 when the expectations of our different, separate groups are in opposition. An example can be found in work–family conflict, which Bill experiences when expectations placed on him as a husband and father differ from those placed on him as an executive with EMM Industries. Bill’s wife and children want to remain in Phoenix, while EMM expects its employees to be responsive to the company’s needs and requirements. Although it might be in Bill’s financial and career interests to accept a relocation, the conflict centers on choosing between family and work role expectations. Indeed, a great deal of research demon- strates that work–family conflict is one of the most significant sources of stress for most employees.22

Within organizations, most employees are simultaneously in occupations, workgroups, divisions, and demographic groups, and these identities can con- flict when the expectations of one clash with the expectations of another.23 During mergers and acquisitions, employees can be torn between their identi- ties as members of their original organization and of the new parent company.24 Multinational organizations also have been shown to lead to dual identification— with the local division and with the international organization.25

role Play and Assimilation The degree to which we comply with our role perceptions and expectations— even when we don’t agree with them initially—can be surprising. One of the most illuminating role and identity experiments was done a number of years ago by psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his associates.26 They created a “prison” in the basement of the Stanford psychology building; hired emotionally stable, physically healthy, law-abiding students who scored “normal average” on personality tests; randomly assigned them the role of either “guard” or “prisoner”; and established some basic rules.

interrole conflict A situation in which the expectations of an individual’s different, separate groups are in opposition.

role conflict A situation in which an individual is confronted by divergent role expectations.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 283

It took little time for the “prisoners” to accept the authority positions of the “guards” and for the mock guards to adjust to their new authority roles. Consistent with social identity theory, the guards came to see the prisoners as a negative outgroup, and they developed stereotypes about the “typical” prisoner personality type. After the guards crushed a rebellion attempt on the second day, the prisoners became increasingly passive. Whatever the guards “dished out,” the prisoners took. The prisoners actually began to believe and act like they were inferior and powerless. Every guard, at some time during the simula- tion, engaged in abusive, authoritative behavior. One said, “I was surprised at myself. . . . I made them call each other names and clean the toilets out with their bare hands. I practically considered the prisoners cattle, and I kept thinking: ‘I have to watch out for them in case they try something.’” Surprisingly, during the entire experiment—even after days of abuse—not one prisoner said, “Stop this. I’m a student like you. This is just an experiment!” The researchers had to end the study after only 6 days because of the participants’ pathological reactions.

What can we conclude from this study? Like the rest of us, the participants had learned stereotyped conceptions of guard and prisoner roles from the mass media and their own personal experiences in power and powerless relationships gained at home (parent–child), in school (teacher–student), and in other situ- ations. This background allowed them easily and rapidly to assume roles and, with a vague notion of the social identity of their roles and no prior personality pathology or training for the parts they were playing, to execute extreme forms of behavior consistent with those roles.

This is not necessarily true. But it’s certainly counterintuitive, so let’s explore the conditions. What is gossip? Most of us might say

gossip is talking about others, sharing rumors, and speculating about others’ behaviors; gossip affects a person’s reputation. We might also say gossip is malicious, but according to researchers, it can serve positive social functions, too. Prosocial gossip can expose behav- ior that exploits other people, which can lead to positive changes. For example, if Julie tells Chris that Alex is bullying Summer, then Chris has learned about Alex’s poor behavior through gossiping. Chris might refuse to partner with Alex on a work project, which might limit Alex’s opportunities with the organiza- tion, preventing him from bullying more people. Alternatively, as the gossip spreads, Alex might feel exposed for his behavior and conform to group expecta- tions against bullying behavior. In fact,

according to research, Alex is likely to cooperate with the group in response to the gossip, and others hearing and spreading the gossip are likely also to cooperate by not acting on their impuls- es toward bad behavior.

What about excluding Alex? There are two types of exclusion in the work- place: leaving someone out of a group, and ostracizing an individual. Both lead to the same end—the person isn’t part of the group—but while simply leaving someone out of a group might not send a message of exclusion, ostracism cer- tainly does. Ostracism is more of a felt punishment than gossip since it is more direct. Research indicates that ostra- cized individuals cooperate to a greater degree when they are around the group to show a willingness to conform, hop- ing to be invited back into the group.

Can gossip and ostracism work together? Yes, according to a recent study. When subjects were given an

opportunity to gossip about the work of another subject, that subject cooperat- ed more than before; when the opportu- nity to gossip was paired with the ability to ostracize, that subject cooperated to a much greater degree.

Thus, gossip and exclusion may provide groups with benefits, at least when the gossip is confined to truthful work-related discussion, when the op- portunity still exists to rejoin the group with full standing, and when the group norms are positive.

Sources: M. Cikara and J. J. Van Bavel, “The Neuroscience of Intergroup Relations: An Integrative Review,” Perspectives on Psycho- logical Science 9, no. 3 (2014): 245–74; M. Feinberg, R. Willer, and M. Schultz, “Gos- sip and Ostracism Promote Cooperation in Groups,” Psychological Science 25, no. 3 (2014): 656–64; and I. H. Smith, K. Aquino, S. Koleva, and J. Graham, “The Moral Ties That Bind…Even to Out-Groups: The Interac- tive Effect of Moral Identity and the Binding Moral Foundations,” Psychological Science (2014): 1554–62.

gossip and exclusion are toxic for groups Myth or science?

284 PART 3 The Group

A follow-up reality television show was conducted by the BBC.27 The BBC results were dramatically different from those of the Stanford experiment, partially because the show used a less intense simulated prison setting. The “guards” were far more careful in their behavior, limiting their aggressive treatment of “prisoners” and expressing concerns about how their actions might be perceived. In short, they did not fully take on their authority roles, possibly because they knew their behavior was being observed by millions of viewers. These results suggest that less intense situations evoke less extreme behavior, and abuse of roles can be limited when people are made conscious of their behavior.

Group Property 2: Norms Did you ever notice that golfers don’t speak while their partners are putting? Why not? The answer is norms.

All groups have established norms—acceptable standards of behavior shared by members that express what they ought and ought not to do under certain circumstances. It’s not enough for group leaders to share their opinions—even if members adopt the leaders’ views, the effect may last only 3 days!28 When agreed to by the group, norms influence behavior with a minimum of external controls. Different groups, communities, and societies have different norms, but they all have them.29 Let’s discuss the levels of influence norms can exert over us, starting with our emotions.

Norms and emotions Have you ever noticed how the emotions of one member of your family, especially strong emotions, can influence the emotions of the other members? A family can be a highly normative group. So can a task group whose members work together on a daily basis, because frequent communication can increase the power of norms. A recent study found that, in a task group, individuals’ emo- tions influenced the group’s emotions and vice versa. This may not be surprising, but researchers also found that norms dictated the experience of emotions for the individuals and for the groups—in other words, people grew to interpret their shared emotions in the same way.30 As we discovered in Chapters 5 and 6, our emotions and moods can shape our perspective, so the normative effect of groups can powerfully influence group attitudes and outcomes.

Norms and Conformity As a member of a group, you desire acceptance by the group. Thus, you are sus- ceptible to conforming to group norms. Considerable evidence suggests that groups can place strong pressures on individual members to change their at- titudes and behaviors to match the group’s standard.31 The impact that group pressures for conformity can have on an individual member’s judgment was demonstrated in studies by Solomon Asch and others.32 Asch made up groups of seven or eight people who were asked to compare two cards. One card had one line, and the other had three lines of varying length, one of which was identical to the line on the one-line card, as Exhibit 9-2 shows. The difference in line length was obvious; in fact, under ordinary conditions, subjects were incorrect less than 1 percent of the time in announcing which of the three lines matched the single line.

The experiment began with sets of matching exercises. Everyone gave the right answers. On the third set, however, the first subject, who was part of the

9-4 Demonstrate how norms exert influence on an individual’s behavior.

norms Acceptable standards of behavior within a group that are shared by the group’s members.

conformity The adjustment of one’s behavior to align with the norms of the group.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 285

W e’ve all experienced peer pres-sure, and it can be hard to behave differently from your friends and coworkers. As more work in organizations is performed in groups and teams, the possibilities and pitfalls of such pressure have become an in- creasingly important ethical issue for managers.

Peer pressure can be a positive force in some ways. In groups where high effort and performance are the norms, peer pressure from coworkers, whether direct or indirect, can encour- age high performance from those not meeting expectations. A group with a norm toward behaving ethically could also use peer pressure to minimize negative behavior. Thus, peer pressure can promote all sorts of good behav- iors, from donating to charity to volun- teering at the local soup kitchen.

However, peer pressure can also be destructive. It can create a feeling of exclusion in those who do not go along with group norms and can be very stressful and hurtful for those who don’t see eye-to-eye with the rest of the group. Peer pressure itself can be an unethical practice that unduly influenc- es workers’ behavior and thoughts. And while groups might pressure others into good behavior, they can just as easily sway them to bad behavior.

Should you use group peer pres- sure? As a leader, you may need to. One survey found that only 6 percent of leaders reported being able to suc- cessfully influence their employees on their own. Peer pressure hastens a group toward consensus, and levels of peer pressure predict how much the leader can control the group. If you use peer pressure to encourage

individuals to work toward team goals and behave consistently with organiza- tional values, it can enhance ethical performance. But your behavior should emphasize acceptance and rewarding of positive behavior, rather than rejec- tion and exclusion, as a means of get- ting everyone to behave consistently in the group.

Sources: E. Estrada and E. Vargas-Estra- da, “How Peer Pressure Shapes Consen- sus, Leadership, and Innovations in Social Groups,” Scientific Reports 3 (2013), article number 2905; A. Verghese, “The Healing Pow- er of Peer Pressure,” Newsweek, March 14, 2011, www.newsweek.com; J. Meer, “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime? Peer Pressure in Charitable Solicitation,” Journal of Public Eco- nomics 95, no. 7–8 (2011): 926–41; and L. Potter, “Lack Influence at Work? Why Most Leaders Struggle to Lead Positive Change,” Yahoo, May 14, 2013, http://finance . yahoo.com/news/lack-influence-why-most- leaders-121500672.html.

Using Peer Pressure as an influence tactic An ethical Choice

examples of Cards used in Asch’s studyExhibit 9-2

X A B C

research team, gave an obviously wrong answer—for example, saying “C” in Exhibit 9-2. The next subject, also on the research team, gave the same wrong answer, and so forth. Now the dilemma confronting the subject, who didn’t know any of the subjects were on the research team, was this: publicly state a perception that differed from the announced position of the others, or give an incorrect answer that agreed with the others.

The results over many experiments showed 75 percent of subjects gave at least one answer that conformed—that they knew was wrong but was consis- tent with the replies of other group members—and the average conformer gave wrong answers 37 percent of the time. This suggests that we feel the pressure toward conformity with group norms. Other recent research with moral decision

286 PART 3 The Group

making indicated an even stronger effect of conformity when subjects found the nonconforming ideas not just incorrect but objectionable.33 Does that mean we are mere robots? Certainly not. The flip side of the 37 percent of conform- ing responses is the 63 percent of independent responses, and 95 percent gave the correct (nonconforming) response at least once. Therefore, we feel the pressure to conform, but it is not a perfect predictor of what we will do. Further- more, we don’t tend to like the pressure. Asch wrote, “Those who participated in this challenging experiment agreed nearly without exception that indepen- dence was preferable to conformity.”34

Do individuals conform to the pressures of all groups to which they belong? Obviously not, because people belong to many groups, and their norms vary and sometimes are contradictory. People conform to their reference groups, in which a person is aware of other members, defines himself or herself as a member or would like to be a member, and feels group members are significant to him or her. The implication, then, is that all groups do not impose equal conformity pressures on their members.

Norms and behavior Norms can cover any aspect of group behavior.35 As we’ve mentioned, norms in the workplace significantly influence employee behavior. This may seem intui- tive, but full appreciation of the influence of norms on worker behavior did not occur until the Hawthorne Studies conducted between 1924 and 1932 at the Western Electric Company’s Hawthorne Works in Chicago.36

In the studies, the researchers first examined the relationship between the physical environment and productivity. As they increased the light level for the experimental group of workers, output rose for that unit and the control group. But as they dropped the light level, productivity continued to increase. In fact, productivity in the experimental group decreased only when the light intensity

reference groups Important groups to which individuals belong or hope to belong and with whose norms individuals are likely to conform.

From studies of employees at the Western Electric Company’s Hawthorne Works in Chicago, researchers gained valuable insights into how individual behavior is influenced by group norms. They also learned that money was less of a factor in determining worker output than were group standards, sentiments, and security. Source: Hawthorne Museum of Morton College

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 287

had been reduced to that of moonlight, leading researchers to believe that group dynamics, rather than the environment, influenced behavior.

The researchers next isolated a small group of women assembling telephones so their behavior could be more carefully observed. Over the next several years, this small group’s output increased steadily, and the number of personal and sick absences was approximately one-third of that in the regular production department. It became evident this group’s performance was significantly influ- enced by its “special” status. The members thought they were in an elite group, and that management showed concern about their interests by engaging in experimentation. In essence, workers in both the illumination and assembly experiments were really reacting to the increased attention they received.

A wage incentive plan was then introduced in the bank wiring observation room. The most important finding was that employees did not individually maximize their output. Rather, their role performance became controlled by a group norm. Members were afraid that if they significantly increased their output, the unit incentive rate might be cut, the expected daily output might be increased, layoffs might occur, or slower workers might be reprimanded. So the group established its idea of a fair output—neither too much nor too little. Members helped each other ensure their reports were nearly level, and the norms the group established included a number of behavioral “don’ts.” Don’t be a rate-buster, turning out too much work. Don’t be a chiseler, turning out too little work. Don’t squeal on any of your peers. The group enforced its norms with name-calling, ridicule, and even punches to the upper arms of violators. It thus operated well below its capability, using norms that were tightly established and strongly enforced.

Positive Norms and Group Outcomes One goal of every organization with corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives is for its values to hold normative sway over employees. After all, if employees aligned their thinking with positive norms, these norms would become stronger and the probability of positive impact would grow exponentially. We might ex- pect the same outcomes from political correctness (PC) norms. But what is the effect of strong positive norms on group outcomes? The popular thinking is that to increase creativity in groups, for instance, norms should be loosened. How- ever, research on gender-diverse groups indicates that strong PC norms increase group creativity. Why? Clear expectations about male-female interactions reduce uncertainty about group expectations,37 which allows the members to more easily express their creative ideas without combatting stereotype norms.

Positive group norms may well beget positive outcomes, but only if other factors are present, too. For instance, in a recent study a high level of group extraversion predicted helping behaviors more strongly when there were posi- tive cooperation norms.38 As powerful as norms can be, though, not everyone is equally susceptible to positive group norms. Individual personalities factor in, too, as well as the level of a person’s social identity with the group. Also, a recent study in Germany indicated that the more satisfied people were with their groups, the more closely they followed group norms.39

Negative Norms and Group Outcomes LeBron is frustrated by a coworker who constantly spreads malicious and unsubstantiated rumors about him. Lindsay is tired of a member of her work- group who, when confronted with a problem, takes out his frustration by yelling and screaming at her and other members. And Mi-Cha recently quit her job as a dental hygienist after being sexually harassed by her employer.

288 PART 3 The Group

What do these illustrations have in common? They represent employees exposed to acts of deviant workplace behavior.40 As we discussed in Chapter 3, counterproductive work behavior (CWB) or deviant workplace behavior (also called antisocial behavior or workplace incivility) is voluntary behavior that violates significant organizational norms and, in so doing, threatens the well-being of the organization or its members. Exhibit 9-3 provides a typology of deviant workplace behaviors, with examples of each.

Few organizations will admit to creating or condoning conditions that encourage and maintain deviant behaviors. Yet they exist. For one, as we dis- cussed before, a workgroup can become characterized by positive or negative attributes. When those attributes are negative, such as when a workgroup is high in psychopathy and aggression, the characteristics of deceit, amorality, and intent to harm others are pronounced.41 Second, employees have been reporting an increase in rudeness and disregard toward others by bosses and coworkers in recent years. Workplace incivility, like many other deviant behav- iors, has many negative outcomes for the victims.42 Nearly half of employees who have suffered this incivility say it has led them to think about changing jobs; 12 percent actually quit because of it.43 Also, a study of nearly 1,500 respondents found that in addition to increasing turnover intentions, incivility at work increased reports of psychological stress and physical illness.44 Third, research suggests that a lack of sleep, which is often caused by heightened work demands and which hinders a person’s ability to regulate emotions and behaviors, can lead to deviant behavior. As organizations have tried to do more with less, pushing their employees to work extra hours, they may indirectly be facilitating deviant behavior.45

Like norms in general, employees’ antisocial actions are shaped by the group context within which they work. Evidence demonstrates deviant work- place behavior is likely to flourish where it’s supported by group norms.46 For example, workers who socialize either at or outside work with people who are frequently absent from work are more likely to be absent themselves.47 Thus when deviant workplace norms surface, employee cooperation, commitment, and motivation are likely to suffer.

deviant workplace behavior Voluntary behavior that violates significant organiza- tional norms and, in so doing, threatens the well-being of the organization or its members. Also called antisocial behavior or workplace incivility.

typology of deviant Workplace behaviorExhibit 9-3

Category Examples

Production Leaving early Intentionally working slowly Wasting resources

Property Sabotage Lying about hours worked Stealing from the organization

Political Showing favoritism Gossiping and spreading rumors Blaming coworkers

Personal aggression Sexual harassment Verbal abuse Stealing from coworkers

Sources: S. H. Appelbaum, G. D. Iaconi, and A. Matousek, “Positive and Negative Deviant Workplace Behaviors: Causes, Impacts, and

Solutions,” Corporate Governance 7, no. 5 (2007): 586–98; and R. W. Griffin, and A. O’Leary-Kelly, The Dark Side of Organizational

Behavior (New York: Wiley, 2004).

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 289

What are the consequences of workplace deviance for groups? Some research suggests a chain reaction occurs in groups with high levels of dysfunctional behavior.48 The process begins with negative behaviors like shirking, undermin- ing coworkers, or being generally uncooperative. As a result of these behaviors, the group collectively starts to have negative moods. These negative moods then result in poor coordination of effort and lower levels of group performance.

Norms and Culture Do people in collectivist cultures have different norms than people in individu- alist cultures? Of course they do. But did you know that our orientation may be changed, even after years of living in one society? In a recent experiment, an organizational role-playing exercise was given to a neutral group of subjects; the exercise stressed either collectivist or individualist norms. Subjects were then given a task of their personal choice or were assigned one by an ingroup or out- group person. When the individualist-primed subjects were allowed personal choice of the task, or the collectivist-primed subjects were assigned the task by an ingroup person, they became more highly motivated.49

Group Property 3: Status, and Group Property 4: Size and Dynamics We’ve discussed how the roles we play and the norms we internalize tend to dictate our behavior in groups. However, those are not the only two factors that influence who we are in a group and how the group functions. Have you ever noticed how groups tend to stratify into higher- and lower-status members? Sometimes the status of members reflects their status outside the group setting, but not always. Also, status often varies between groups of different sizes. Let’s examine how these factors affect a workgroup’s efficacy.

Group Property 3: status Status—a socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members by others—permeates every society. Even the smallest group will show differ- ences in member status over time. Status is a significant motivator and has major behavioral consequences when individuals perceive a disparity between what they believe their status is and what others perceive it to be.

What determines status? According to status characteristics theory, status tends to derive from one of three sources:50

1. The power a person wields over others. Because they likely control the group’s resources, people who control group outcomes tend to be perceived as high status.

2. A person’s ability to contribute to a group’s goals. People whose contribu- tions are critical to the group’s success tend to have high status.

3. An individual’s personal characteristics. Someone whose personal characteristics are positively valued by the group (good looks, intelligence, money, or a friendly personality) typically has higher status than someone with fewer valued attributes.

status and Norms Status has some interesting effects on the power of norms and pressures to conform. High-status individuals may be more likely to de- viate from norms when they have low identification (social identity) with the

9-5 Show how status and size differences affect group performance.

status A socially defined position or rank given to groups or group members by others.

status characteristics theory A theory that states that differences in status characteristics create status hierarchies within groups.

290 PART 3 The Group

group.51 They also eschew pressure from lower-ranking members of other groups. For instance, physicians actively resist administrative decisions made by lower- ranking medical insurance company employees.52 High-status people are also better able to resist conformity pressures than their lower-status peers. An individual who is highly valued by a group but doesn’t need or care about the group’s social rewards is particularly able to disregard conformity norms.53 In general, bringing high-status members into a group may improve performance, but only up to a point, perhaps because these members may introduce counter- productive norms.54

status and Group Interaction People tend to become more assertive when they seek to attain higher status in a group.55 They speak out more often, criti- cize more, state more commands, and interrupt others more often. Lower- status members tend to participate less actively in group discussions; when they possess expertise and insights that could aid the group, failure to fully uti- lize these members reduces the group’s overall performance. But that doesn’t mean a group of only high-status individuals would be preferable. Adding some high-status individuals to a group of mid-status individuals may be advanta- geous because group performance suffers when too many high-status people are in the mix.56

status Inequity It is important for group members to believe the status hierarchy is equitable. Perceived inequity creates disequilibrium, which inspires various types of corrective behaviors. Hierarchical groups can lead to resentment among those at the lower end of the status continuum. Large differences in status within groups are also associated with poorer individual performance, lower health, and higher intentions for the lower-status members to leave the group.57

Aaron Rodgers has high status as the quarterback of the Green Bay Packers football team. His status derives from his ability to contribute to his team’s success in winning games. Rodgers’s teammates and coaches value his character, leadership skills, expertise in calling plays, and ability to accurately throw touchdown passes on the move. Source: Matt Ludtke/AP Images

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 291

Groups generally agree within themselves on status criteria; hence, there is usually high concurrence on group rankings of individuals. Business executives may use personal income or the growth rate of their companies as determinants of status. Government bureaucrats may use the size of their budgets, and blue- collar workers may use their years of seniority. Managers who occupy central positions in their social networks are typically seen as higher in status by their subordinates, and this position actually translates into greater influence over the group’s functioning.58

Groups generally form an informal status order based on ranking and com- mand of needed resources.59 Individuals can find themselves in conflicts when they move between groups whose status criteria are different, or when they join groups whose members have heterogeneous backgrounds. Cultures also differ in their criteria for conferring status upon individuals. When groups are hetero- geneous, status differences may initiate conflict as the group attempts to recon- cile the separate hierarchies. As we’ll see in Chapter 10, this can be a problem when management creates teams of employees from varied functions.

status and stigmatization Although it’s clear that your own status affects the way people perceive you, the status of people with whom you are affiliated can also affect others’ views of you. Studies have shown that people who are stigmatized can “infect” others with their stigma. This “stigma by association” effect can result in negative opinions and evaluations of the person affiliat- ed with the stigmatized individual, even if the association is brief and purely coincidental. Of course, many of the foundations of cultural status differenc- es have no merit in the first place. For example, men interviewing for a job were viewed as less qualified when they were sitting next to an obese woman in a waiting room. Another study looking at the effects of being associated with an overweight person found that even when onlookers were told the tar- get person and the overweight person were unrelated, the target person was still devalued.60

Group status Early in life, we acquire an “us and them” mentality.61 You may have correctly surmised that if you are in an outgroup, your group is of lower status in the eyes of the associated ingroup’s members. Culturally, sometimes ingroups represent the dominant forces in a society and are given high status, which can create discrimination against their outgroups. Low-status groups, perhaps in response to this discrimination, are likely to leverage ingroup fa- voritism to compete for higher status.62 When high-status groups then feel the discrimination from low-status groups, they may increase their bias against the outgroups.63 With each cycle, the groups become more polarized.

Group Property 4: size and dynamics Does the size of a group affect the group’s overall behavior? Yes, but the effect depends on what dependent variables we examine. Groups with a dozen or more members are good for gaining diverse input. If the goal is fact-finding or idea-generating, then, larger groups should be more effective. Smaller groups of about seven members are better at doing something productive.

One of the most important findings about the size of a group concerns social loafing, the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collec- tively than when alone.64 Social loafing directly challenges the assumption that the productivity of the group as a whole should at least equal the sum of the productivity of the individuals in it, no matter what the group size.

What causes social loafing? It may be a belief that others in the group are not carrying their fair share. If you see others as lazy or inept, you can reestablish

social loafing The tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working collectively than when working individually.

292 PART 3 The Group

equity by reducing your effort. But simply failing to contribute may not be enough for someone to be labeled a “free rider.” Instead, the group must believe the social loafer is acting in an exploitive manner (benefitting at the expense of other team members).65 Another explanation for social loafing is the diffusion of responsibility. Because group results cannot be attributed to any single person, the relationship between an individual’s input and the group’s output is clouded. Individuals may then be tempted to become free riders and coast on the group’s efforts.

The implications for OB are significant. When managers use collective work situations, they must also be able to identify individual efforts. Furthermore, greater performance diversity creates greater social loafing the longer a group is together, which decreases satisfaction and performance.66

Social loafing appears to have a Western bias. It’s consistent with individual- ist cultures, such as the United States and Canada, that are dominated by self- interest. It is not consistent with collectivist societies, in which individuals are motivated by group goals. For example, in studies comparing U.S. employees with employees from China and Israel (both collectivist societies), the Chinese and Israelis showed no propensity to engage in social loafing and actually per- formed better in a group than alone.

Research indicates that the stronger an individual’s work ethic is, the less likely that person is to engage in social loafing.67 Also, the greater the level of conscientiousness and agreeableness in a group, the more likely that per- formance will remain high whether there is social loafing or not.68 There are ways to prevent social loafing: (1) set group goals, so the group has a common purpose to strive toward; (2) increase intergroup competition, which focuses on the shared group outcome; (3) engage in peer evaluations; (4) select members who have high motivation and prefer to work in groups; and (5)  base group rewards in part on each member’s unique contribu- tions.69 Recent research indicates that social loafing can be counteracted by publicly posting individual performance ratings for group members, too.70 Although no magic bullet will prevent social loafing, these steps should help minimize its effect.

Young employees of Alibaba’s Tmall online shopping site celebrate their group’s achievement of increasing the volume of sales orders during China’s “Singles Day” shopping event. Although social loafing is consistent with individualistic cultures, in collec- tivist societies such as China, employ- ees are motivated by group goals and perform better in groups than they do by working individually. Source: Han Chuanhao Xinhua News Agency/Newscom

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 293

Group Property 5: Cohesiveness, and Group Property 6: Diversity For a group to be highly functioning, it must act cohesively as a unit, but not because all the group members think and act alike. In some ways, the properties of cohesiveness and diversity need to be valued way back at the tacit establishment of roles and norms—will the group be inclusive of all its members, regardless of dif- ferences in backgrounds? Let’s discuss the importance of group cohesiveness first.

Group Property 5: Cohesiveness Groups differ in their cohesiveness—the degree to which members are attracted to each other and motivated to stay in the group. Some workgroups are cohesive because the members have spent a great deal of time together, the group’s small size or purpose facilitates high interaction, or external threats have brought members close together.

Cohesiveness affects group productivity. Studies consistently show that the rela- tionship between cohesiveness and productivity depends on the group’s perfor- mance-related norms.71 If norms for quality, output, and cooperation with outsid- ers are high, a cohesive group will be more productive than a less cohesive group. But if cohesiveness is high and performance norms are low, productivity will be low. If cohesiveness is low and performance norms are high, productivity increases, but less than in the high-cohesiveness/high-norms situation. When cohesiveness and performance-related norms are both low, productivity tends to fall into the low-to-moderate range. These conclusions are summarized in Exhibit 9-4.

What can you do to encourage group cohesiveness? (1) Make the group smaller, (2) encourage agreement with group goals, (3) increase the time mem- bers spend together, (4) increase the group’s status and the perceived difficulty of attaining membership, (5) stimulate competition with other groups, (6) give rewards to the group rather than to individual members, and (7) physically isolate the group.72

Group Property 6: diversity The final property of groups we consider is diversity in the group’s membership, or the degree to which members of the group are similar to, or different from, one another. Overall, studies identify both costs and benefits from group diversity.

9-6 Describe how issues of cohesiveness and diversity can be integrated for group effectiveness.

cohesiveness The degree to which group members are attracted to each other and are motivated to stay in the group.

diversity The extent to which members of a group are similar to, or different from, one another.

relationship between Group Cohesiveness, Performance Norms, and Productivity

Exhibit 9-4

High productivity

High

High

Low

Cohesiveness

Pe rf

or m

an ce

N or

m s

w Low productivity

LowLow

Moderate productivity

Moderate to low productivity

294 PART 3 The Group

Diversity appears to increase group conflict, especially in the early stages of a group’s tenure; this often lowers group morale and raises dropout rates. One study compared groups that were culturally diverse and homogeneous (composed of people from the same country). On a wilderness survival test, the groups performed equally well, but the members from the diverse groups were less satisfied with their groups, were less cohesive, and had more conflict.73 Another study examined the effect of differences in tenure on the performance of 67 engineering research and development groups.74 When most people had roughly the same level of tenure, performance was high, but as tenure diversity increased, performance dropped off. There was an important qualifier: Higher levels of tenure diversity were not related to lower performance for groups when there were effective team-oriented human resources (HR) practices. More spe- cifically, groups in which members’ values or opinions differ tend to experience more conflict, but leaders who can get the group to focus on the task at hand and encourage group learning are able to reduce these conflicts and enhance discussion of group issues.75 Gender diversity can also be a challenge to a group, but if inclusiveness is stressed, group conflict and dissatisfaction are lowered.76

You may have correctly surmised that the type of group diversity matters. Surface-level diversity—in observable characteristics such as national origin, race, and gender—alerts people to possible deep-level diversity—in underlying attitudes, values, and opinions. One researcher argues, “The mere presence of diversity you can see, such as a person’s race or gender, actually cues a team that there’s likely to be differences of opinion.”77 Surface-level diversity may subconsciously cue team members to be more open-minded in their views.78 For example, two studies of MBA student groups found surface-level diversity led to greater openness. The effects of deep-level diversity are less understood. Research in Korea indicates that putting people with a high need for power with those with a low need for power can reduce unproductive group competition, whereas putting individuals with a similar need for achievement may increase task performance.79

Although differences can lead to conflict, they also provide an opportunity to solve problems in unique ways. One study of jury behavior found diverse juries were more likely to deliberate longer, share more information, and make fewer factual errors when discussing evidence. Altogether, the impact of diversity on groups is mixed. It is difficult to be in a diverse group in the short term. However, if members can weather their differences, over time diversity may help them be more open-minded and creative and to do better. But even positive effects are unlikely to be especially strong. As one review stated, “The business case (in terms of demonstrable financial results) for diversity remains hard to support based on the extant research.”80 Yet, other researchers argue that we shouldn’t overlook the effects of homogeneity, many of which can be detrimental.81

PerSonAl InVenTory ASSeSSmenTS communicating Supportively Are you a supportive person? Take this PIA to find out if you communicate supportively.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

One possible side effect in diverse teams—especially those that are diverse in terms of surface-level characteristics—is faultlines, or perceived divisions that split groups into two or more subgroups based on individual differences such as sex, race, age, work experience, and education.

faultlines The perceived divisions that split groups into two or more subgroups based on individual differences such as sex, race, age, work experience, and education.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 295

For example, let’s say group A is composed of three men and three women. The three men have approximately the same amount of work experience and backgrounds in marketing. The three women have about the same amount of work experience and backgrounds in finance. Group B has three men and three women, but they all differ in terms of their experience and backgrounds. Two of the men are experienced, while the other is new. One of the women has worked at the company for several years, while the other two are new. In addition, two of the men and one woman in group B have backgrounds in marketing, while the other man and the remaining two women have backgrounds in finance. It is thus likely that a faultline will result in subgroups of males and females in group A but not in group B, based on the differentiating characteristics.

Research on faultlines has shown that splits are generally detrimental to group functioning and performance. Subgroups may compete with each other, which takes time away from core tasks and harms group performance. Groups that have subgroups learn more slowly, make more risky decisions, are less cre- ative, and experience higher levels of conflict. Subgroups may not trust each other. Finally, satisfaction with subgroups is generally high, but the overall group’s satisfaction is lower when faultlines are present.82

Are faultlines ever a good thing? One study suggested that faultlines based on differences in skill, knowledge, and expertise could be beneficial when the groups were in organizational cultures that strongly emphasized results. Why? A results-driven culture focuses people’s attention on what’s important to the company rather than on problems arising from subgroups.83 Another study showed that problems stemming from strong faultlines based on gen- der and educational major were counteracted when their roles were cross-cut and the group as a whole was given a common goal to strive for. Together, these strategies force collaboration between members of subgroups and focus their efforts on accomplishing a goal that transcends the boundary imposed by the faultline.84

Overall, although research on faultlines suggests that diversity in groups is potentially a double-edged sword, recent work indicates they can be strategically employed to improve performance.

Group Decision Making The belief—characterized by juries—that two heads are better than one has long been accepted as a basic component of the U.S. legal system and those of many other countries. Many decisions in organizations are made by groups, teams, or committees. We’ll discuss the advantages of group decision making, along with the unique challenges group dynamics bring to the decision-making process. Finally, we’ll offer some techniques for maximizing the group decision- making opportunity.

Groups versus the Individual Decision-making groups may be widely used in organizations, but are group decisions preferable to those made by an individual alone? The answer depends on a number of factors. Let’s begin by looking at the strengths and weaknesses of group decision making.

strengths of Group decision Making Groups generate more complete information and knowledge. By aggregating the resources of several individuals, groups bring more input as well as heterogeneity into the decision process. They offer increased diversity of views. This opens up the opportunity to consider more

9-7 Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of group decision making.

296 PART 3 The Group

approaches  and alternatives. Finally, groups lead to increased acceptance of a solution. Group members who participate in making a decision are more likely to enthusiastically support and encourage others to accept it later.

Weaknesses of Group decision Making Group decisions are time-consuming because groups typically take more time to reach a solution. There are confor- mity pressures. The desire by group members to be accepted and considered an asset to the group can squash any overt disagreement. Group discussion can be dominated by one or a few members. If they’re low- and medium-ability members, the group’s overall effectiveness will suffer. Finally, group decisions suffer from ambiguous responsibility. In an individual decision, it’s clear who is accountable for the final outcome. In a group decision, the responsibility of any single member is diluted.

effectiveness and efficiency Whether groups are more effective than individ- uals depends on how you define effectiveness. Group decisions are generally more accurate than the decisions of the average individual in a group, but less accurate than the judgments of the most accurate person.85 In terms of speed, individuals are superior. If creativity is important, groups tend to be more effec- tive. And if effectiveness means the degree of acceptance of achievable solutions, the nod again goes to the group.86

But we cannot consider effectiveness without also assessing efficiency. With few exceptions, group decision making consumes more work hours than having an individual tackle the same problem. The exceptions tend to be instances in which, to achieve comparable quantities of diverse input, the single decision maker must spend a great deal of time reviewing files and talk- ing to other people. In deciding whether to use groups, then, managers must assess whether increases in effectiveness are more than enough to offset the reductions in efficiency.

In summary, groups are an excellent vehicle for performing many steps in the decision-making process and offer both breadth and depth of input for information gathering. If group members have diverse backgrounds, the alter- natives generated should be more extensive and the analysis more critical. When the final solution is agreed on, there are more people in a group decision to support and implement it. These pluses, however, may be more than offset by the time consumed by group decisions, the internal conflicts they create, and the pressures they generate toward conformity. We must be careful to define the types of conflicts, however. Research in Korea indicates that group conflicts about tasks may increase group performance, while conflicts in relationships may decrease performance.87 In some cases, therefore, we can expect individu- als to make better decisions than groups.

Groupthink and Groupshift Two by-products of group decision making, groupthink and groupshift, can affect a group’s ability to appraise alternatives objectively and achieve high- quality solutions.

Groupthink relates to norms and describes situations in which group pres- sures for conformity deter the group from critically appraising unusual, minor- ity, or unpopular views. Groupthink attacks many groups and can dramatically hinder their performance. Groupshift describes the way group members tend to exaggerate their initial positions when discussing a given set of alternatives to arrive at a solution. In some situations, caution dominates and there is a conser- vative shift, while in other situations groups tend toward a risky shift. Let’s look at each phenomenon in detail.

groupthink A phenomenon in which the norm for consensus overrides the realistic appraisal of alternative courses of action.

groupshift A change between a group’s decision and an individual decision that a member within the group would make; the shift can be toward either conservatism or greater risk but it generally is toward a more extreme version of the group’s original position.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 297

Groupthink Groupthink appears closely aligned with the conclusions Solomon Asch drew in his experiments with a lone dissenter. Individuals who hold a position different from that of the dominant majority are under pressure to suppress, withhold, or modify their true feelings and beliefs. As members of a group, we find it more pleasant to be in agreement—to be a positive part of the group—than to be a disruptive force, even if disruption would improve ef- fectiveness. Groups that are more focused on performance than learning are especially likely to fall victim to groupthink and to suppress the opinions of those who do not agree with the majority.88

Does groupthink attack all groups? No. It seems to occur most often when there is a clear group identity, when members hold a positive image of their group they want to protect, and when the group perceives a collective threat to its positive image.89 One study showed that those influenced by groupthink were more confident about their course of action early on;90 however, groups that believe too strongly in the correctness of their course of action are more likely to suppress dissent and encourage conformity than groups that are more skeptical about their course of action.

What can managers do to minimize groupthink?91 First, they can monitor group size. People grow more intimidated and hesitant as group size increases, and although there is no magic number that will eliminate groupthink, indi- viduals are likely to feel less personal responsibility when groups get larger

I’ve got a great workgroup, except for one thing: the others make me omit negative information about our group’s success that I’m in charge of as the treasurer. They gang up on me, insult me, and threaten me, so in the end I report what they want. They say omit- ting the negative information is not re- ally wrong, and it doesn’t violate our organization’s rules, but on my own I would report everything. I need to stay in the group or I’ll lose my job. If we are called out on the numbers, can I just put the blame on the whole group?

— Jean-Claude Dear Jean-Claude: The short answer is that, since you are in a leadership role in the group, you may not have the option of blaming the others. Further, you may be held indi- vidually accountable as a leader for the outcomes of this situation.

Your dilemma is not unusual. Once we think of ourselves as part of a

collective, we want to stay in the group and can become vulnerable to pres- sures to conform. The pressure you’re getting from multiple members can make you aware that you’re in the mi- nority in the group, and taunting can make you feel like an outsider or lesser member; therefore threats to harm your group standing may feel powerful.

So you have a choice: Submit to the pressure and continue misrepresenting your group’s success, or adhere to the responsibility you have as the treasurer and come clean. From an ethical stand- point, we hope you don’t consider the first option an acceptable choice. To make a change, you may be able to use social identification to your advantage. Rather than challenging the group as a whole, try meeting with individual group members to build trust, talking to each as fellow members of a worthy group that can succeed without any ethical quandaries. Don’t try to build a coalition; instead, build trust with individuals and

change the climate of the group to value ethical behavior. Then the next time you need to report the numbers, you can call upon the group’s increased ethical awareness to gain support for your lead- ership decisions.

Sources: M. Cikara and J. J. Van Bavel, “The Neuroscience of Intergroup Relations: An Integrative Review,” Perspectives on Psycho- logical Science 9, no. 3 (2014): 245–74; M. A. Korsgaard, H. H. Brower, and S. W. Lester, “It Isn’t Always Mutual: A Critical Review of Dyadic Trust,” Journal of Management 41, no. 1 (2015): 47–70; R. L. Priem and P. C. Nystrom, “Exploring the Dynamics of Work- group Fracture: Common Ground, Trust-With- Trepidation, and Warranted Distrust,” Journal of Management 40, no. 3 (2014): 674–795.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results ob- tained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any deci- sion made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

can i fudge the numbers and not take the blame? Career Objectives

298 PART 3 The Group

than about 10 members. Managers should also encourage group leaders to play an impartial role. Leaders should actively seek input from all members and avoid expressing their own opinions, especially in the early stages of delib- eration. In addition, managers should appoint one group member to play the role of devil’s advocate, overtly challenging the majority position and offering divergent perspectives. Yet another suggestion is to use exercises that stimulate active discussion of diverse alternatives without threatening the group or inten- sifying identity protection. Have group members delay discussion of possible gains so they can first talk about the dangers or risks inherent in a decision. Requiring members to initially focus on the negatives of an alternative makes the group less likely to stifle dissenting views and more likely to gain an objec- tive evaluation.

Groupshift or Group Polarization There are differences between group deci- sions and the individual decisions of group members.92 In groups, discussion leads members toward a more extreme view of the position they already held. Conservatives become more cautious, and more aggressive types take on more risk. We can view this group polarization as a special case of groupthink. The group’s decision reflects the dominant decision-making norm—toward greater caution or more risk—that develops during discussion.

The shift toward polarization has several explanations.93 It’s been argued, for instance, that discussion makes the members more comfortable with each other and thus more willing to express extreme versions of their original posi- tions. Another argument is that the group diffuses responsibility. Group deci- sions free any single member from accountability for the group’s final choice, so a more extreme position can be taken. It’s also likely that people take extreme positions because they want to demonstrate how different they are from the outgroup.94 People on the fringes of political or social movements take on ever- more-extreme positions just to prove they are really committed to the cause, whereas those who are more cautious tend to take moderate positions to dem- onstrate how reasonable they are.

So how should you use the findings on groupshift? Recognize that group decisions exaggerate the initial position of individual members, that the shift has been shown more often to be toward greater risk, and that which way a group will shift is a function of the members’ pre-discussion inclinations.

We now turn to the techniques by which groups make decisions. These reduce some of the dysfunctional aspects of group decision making.

Group decision-Making techniques The most common form of group decision making takes place in interacting groups. Members meet face to face and rely on both verbal and nonverbal interaction to communicate. But as our discussion of groupthink demonstrated, interacting groups often censor themselves and pressure individual members toward conformity of opinion. Brainstorming and the nominal group technique can reduce problems inherent in the traditional interacting group.

brainstorming Brainstorming can overcome the pressures for conformity that dampen creativity95 by encouraging any and all alternatives while withholding criticism. In a typical brainstorming session, a half-dozen to a dozen people sit around a table. The group leader states the problem in a clear manner so all participants understand. Members then freewheel as many alternatives as they can in a given length of time. To encourage members to “think the unusual,” no criticism is allowed, even of the most bizarre suggestions, and all ideas are recorded for later discussion and analysis.

interacting groups Typical groups in which members interact with each other face to face.

brainstorming An idea-generation process that specifically encourages any and all alternatives while withholding any criticism of those alternatives.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 299

Brainstorming may indeed generate ideas—but not in a very efficient manner. Research consistently shows individuals working alone generate more ideas than a group in a brainstorming session. One reason for this is “production blocking.” When people are generating ideas in a group, many are talking at once, which blocks individuals’ thought process and eventually impedes the sharing of ideas.96

Nominal Group technique The nominal group technique may be more effective. This technique restricts discussion and interpersonal communication during the decision-making process. Group members are all physically present, as in a traditional meeting, but they operate independently. Specifically, a problem is presented and then the group takes the following steps:

1. Before any discussion takes place, each member independently writes down ideas about the problem.

2. After this silent period, each member presents one idea to the group. No discussion takes place until all ideas have been presented and recorded.

3. The group discusses the ideas for clarity and evaluates them. 4. Each group member silently and independently rank-orders the ideas. The

idea with the highest aggregate ranking determines the final decision.

The chief advantage of the nominal group technique is that it permits a group to meet formally but does not restrict independent thinking. Research generally shows nominal groups outperform brainstorming groups.97

Each of the group-decision techniques has its own set of strengths and weak- nesses. The choice depends on the criteria you want to emphasize and the cost–benefit trade-off. As Exhibit 9-5 indicates, an interacting group is good for achieving commitment to a solution, brainstorming develops group cohesive- ness, and the nominal group technique is an inexpensive means for generating a large number of ideas.

Summary We can draw several implications from our discussion of groups. First, norms control behavior by establishing standards of right and wrong. Second, status inequities create frustration and can adversely influence productivity and will- ingness to remain with an organization. Third, the impact of size on a group’s

nominal group technique A group decision-making method in which individual members meet face to face to pool their judgments in a systematic but independent fashion.

evaluating Group effectivenessExhibit 9-5

Type of Group

Effectiveness Criteria Interacting Brainstorming Nominal

Number and quality of ideas Low Moderate High Social pressure High Low Moderate Money costs Low Low Low Speed Moderate Moderate Moderate Task orientation Low High High Potential for interpersonal conflict High Low Moderate Commitment to solution High Not applicable Moderate Development of group cohesiveness High High Moderate

300 PART 3 The Group

performance depends on the type of task. Fourth, cohesiveness may influence a group’s level of productivity, depending on the group’s performance-related norms. Fifth, diversity appears to have a mixed impact on group performance, with some studies suggesting that diversity can help performance and others suggesting the opposite. Sixth, role conflict is associated with job-induced ten- sion and job dissatisfaction.98 Groups can be carefully managed toward positive organizational outcomes and optimal decision-making. The next chapter will explore several of these conclusions in greater depth.

Implications for Managers ●● Recognize that groups can dramatically affect individual behavior in

organizations, to either positive or negative effect. Therefore, pay spe- cial attention to roles, norms, and cohesion—to understand how these are operating within a group is to understand how the group is likely to behave.

●● To decrease the possibility of deviant workplace activities, ensure that group norms do not support antisocial behavior.

●● Pay attention to the status aspect of groups. Because lower-status people tend to participate less in group discussions, groups with high status dif- ferences are likely to inhibit input from lower-status members and reduce their potential.

●● Use larger groups for fact-finding activities and smaller groups for action-taking tasks. With larger groups, provide measures of individual performance.

●● To increase employee satisfaction, make certain people perceive their job roles accurately.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 301

People are More creative When they Work alone

I know groups are all the rage. Businesses are knocking down walls and cubicles to create more open, “collaborative” environments. Students in universities are constantly working on group projects, and even young children are learning in small groups.

I also know why groups are all the rage. Work, they say, has become too complex for individuals to perform alone. Groups are better at brainstorming and coming up with creative solutions to complicated problems. Groups also produce higher levels of commitment and sat- isfaction—so long as group members develop feelings of cohesiveness and trust one another.

But for every group that comes up with a creative solution, I’ll show you twice as many individuals who would come up with a bet- ter solution had they only been left alone. Consider creative geniuses like DaVinci, newton, and Picasso. or more recently, Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple Computer. All were introverts who toiled by themselves. According to Wozniak, “I’m going to give you some advice that might be hard to take. That advice is: Work alone … not on a com- mittee. not on a team.”

But enough anecdotal evidence. research has also shown that groups can kill creativity. one study found that computer program- mers at companies that give them privacy and freedom from inter- ruptions outperformed their counterparts at companies that forced more openness and collaboration. or consider Adrian Furnham, an organizational psychologist whose research led him to conclude that “business people must be insane to use brainstorming groups.” Peo- ple slack off in groups, and they’re afraid to communicate any ideas that might make them sound dumb. These problems don’t exist when people work alone.

So heed Picasso’s advice: “Without great solitude, no serious work is possible.”

PoInT

I’ll grant you there are circumstances in which groups can hinder creative progress, but if the right conditions are put in place, groups are simply much better at coming up with novel solutions to problems than are individuals. Using strategies such as the nominal group technique, brainstorming, and ensuring that individuals do not evaluate others’ ideas until all have been generated are just a few ways you can set up groups for creative success.

The fact of the matter is that problems are too complex these days for individuals to effectively perform alone. Consider the rov- ers launched by nASA to roam around mars collecting data. An ac- complishment like that is made possible only by a group, not a lone individual. Steve Wozniak’s collaboration with Steve Jobs is what really made Apple sail as a company. And could you assemble a car all by yourself?

In addition, the most influential research is conducted by groups of academics, rather than individuals. Indeed, if you look at recent nobel Prize winners in areas such as economics, physics, and chemistry, the majority have been won by academics who collaborated on the research.

So if you want creativity (and who doesn’t?), two heads are in fact better than one.

CounTerPoInT

Sources: S. Cain, “The rise of the new Groupthink,” The New York Times, January 15, 2012, 1, 6; and C. Faure, “Beyond Brainstorming: effects of Different Group Procedures on Selection of Ideas and Satisfaction with the Process,” Journal of Creative Behavior 38 (2004): 13–34.

302 PART 3 The Group

chaPter revieW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QUestiOns fOr revieW

9-1 What are the different types of groups? 9-2 What are the key components of the punctuated-equilibrium model?

9-3 How do role requirements change in different situations?

9-4 How do group norms influence an individual’s behavior?

9-5 How do status and size differences affect group performance?

9-6 How can cohesiveness and diversity support group effectiveness?

9-7 What are the strengths and weaknesses of group (versus individual) decision making?

exPerientiaL exercise Surviving the Wild: Join a Group or Go It Alone? You are a member of a hiking party. After reaching base camp on the first day, you decide to take a quick sun- set hike by yourself. After a few exhilarating miles, you decide to return to camp. On your way back, you realize you are lost. You shout for help, to no avail. It is now dark. And getting cold.

Your Task Without communicating with anyone else in your group, read the following scenarios and choose the best answer. Keep track of your answers on a sheet of paper. You have 10 minutes to answer the 10 questions.

9-8. The first thing you decide to do is to build a fire. However, you have no matches, so you use the bow-and-drill method. What is the bow-and-drill method? a. A dry, soft stick is rubbed between the hands

against a board of supple green wood. b. A soft green stick is rubbed between the hands

against a hardwood board. c. A straight stick of wood is quickly rubbed back

and forth against a dead tree. d. Two sticks (one being the bow, the other the

drill) are struck to create a spark. 9-9. It occurs to you that you can also use the fire as a

distress signal. How do you form the international distress signal with fire? a. 2 fires b. 4 fires in a square

c. 4 fires in a cross d. 3 fires in a line

9-10. You are very thirsty. You go to a nearby stream and collect some water in the small metal cup you have in your backpack. How long should you boil the water? a. 15 minutes b. A few seconds c. 1 minute d. It depends on the altitude.

9-11. You are very hungry, so you decide to eat what appear to be edible berries. When performing the universal edibility test, what should you do? a. Do not eat for 2 hours before the test. b. If the plant stings your lip, confirm the sting by

holding it under your tongue for 15 minutes. c. If nothing bad has happened 2 hours after

digestion, eat half a cup of the plant and wait again.

d. Separate the plant into its basic components and eat each component, one at a time.

9-12. Next, you decide to build a shelter for the evening. In selecting a site, what do you not have to consider? a. It must contain material to make the type of

shelter you need. b. It must be free of insects, reptiles, and

poisonous plants.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 303

c. It must be large enough and level enough for you to lie down comfortably.

d. It must be on a hill so you can signal rescuers and keep an eye on your surroundings.

9-13. In the shelter, you notice a spider. You heard from a fellow hiker that black widow spiders populate the area. How do you identify a black widow spider? a. Its head and abdomen are black; its thorax

is red. b. It is attracted to light. c. It runs away from light. d. It is dark with a red or orange marking on the

female’s abdomen. 9-14. After getting some sleep, you notice that the night

sky has cleared, so you decide to try to find your way back to base camp. You believe you can use the North Star for navigation. How do you locate the North Star? a. Hold your right hand up as far as you can and

look between your index and middle fingers. b. Find Sirius and look 60 degrees above it and to

the right. c. Look for the Big Dipper and follow the line

created by its cup end. d. Follow the line of Orion’s belt.

9-15. You come across a fast-moving stream. What is the best way to cross it? a. Find a spot downstream from a sandbar, where

the water will be calmer. b. Build a bridge. c. Find a rocky area, because the water will be

shallow and you will have hand- and footholds. d. Find a level stretch where it breaks into a few

channels. 9-16. After walking for about an hour, you feel several

spiders in your clothes. You don’t feel any pain, but you know some spider bites are painless. Which of these spider bites is painless? a. Black widow b. Brown recluse c. Wolf spider d. Harvestman (daddy longlegs)

9-17. You decide to eat some insects. Which insects should you avoid? a. Adults that sting or bite b. Caterpillars and insects that have a pungent

odor c. Hairy or brightly colored ones d. All the above

Group Task Next, break into groups of five or six people. Once the group comes to an agreement for what to do in each sit- uation, write your decision on the same sheet of paper you used for your individual answers.

Scoring Your Answers Your instructor will provide you with the correct answers, which are based on expert judgments in these situations. Once you have received the answers, calculate (A) your individual score; (B) your group’s score; (C) the average individual score in the group; and (D) the best individu- al score in the group. Write these down and consult with your group to ensure they are accurate.

A. Your individual score                                B. Your group’s score                                C. Average individual score in group                                D. Best individual score in group                               

Discussion Questions 9-18. How did your group (B) perform relative to your-

self (A)? 9-19. How did your group (B) perform relative to the

average individual score in the group (C)? 9-20. How did your group (B) perform relative to the

best individual score in the group (D)? 9-21. Compare your results with those of other groups.

Did some groups do a better job of outperforming individuals than others?

9-22. What do these results tell you about the effective- ness of group decision making?

9-23. What can groups do to make group decision mak- ing more effective?

9-24. What circumstances might cause a group to per- form worse than its best individual?

ethicaL DiLeMMa Is Social Loafing Unethical? As we discussed in this chapter, social loafing is one poten- tial downside of working in groups. Research suggests that regardless of the type of task, when working in a group, most individuals contribute less than if they were working on their own. Sometimes these people are labeled shirk- ers because they don’t fulfill their responsibilities as group members. Other times, social loafing is overlooked, and industrious employees do the work to meet the group’s

performance goals. Either way, social loafing creates an ethical dilemma.

Whether in class projects or in jobs we’ve held, most of us have experienced social loafing in groups. We may even have been guilty ourselves. Although limiting group size, holding individuals responsible for their contributions, set- ting group goals, and rewarding both individual and group performance might help reduce the occurrence of social

304 PART 3 The Group

loafing, in many cases people just try to work around shirk- ers rather than motivate them to perform at higher levels.

Managers must determine what level of social loafing for groups and for individual employees will be tolerated in terms of nonproductive meetings, performance expec- tations, and counterproductive work behaviors. Employees must decide what limits to social loafing they will impose on themselves and what tolerance they have for social loaf- ers in their workgroups.

Questions 9-25. Do group members have an ethical responsibil-

ity to report shirkers to leadership? If you were

working on a group project for a class and a group member was loafing, would you commu- nicate this information to the instructor? Why or why not?

9-26. Do you think social loafing is always shirking (failing to live up to your responsibilities)? Are there times when shirking is ethical or even justified?

9-27. Social loafing has been found to be higher in individualist nations than in other countries. Do you think this means we should tolerate shirk- ing on the part of U.S. students and workers to a greater degree than if someone else does it?

case inciDent 1 The Calamities of Consensus When it is time for groups to reach a decision, many turn to consensus. Consensus, a situation of agree- ment, seems like a good idea. To achieve consensus, groups must cooperate and collaborate, which ulti- mately will produce higher levels of camaraderie and trust. In addition, if everyone agrees, the prevailing wisdom says  everyone will be more committed to the decision.

However, the need for consensus can sometimes be detrimental to group functioning. Consider the “fiscal cliff” faced by the U.S. government toward the end of 2012. The White House and Congress needed to reach a deal that would reduce the swelling budget deficit. How- ever, many Republicans and Democrats stuck to their party lines, refusing to compromise. Many viewed the end product that achieved consensus as a less-than-optimal so- lution. The public gave Congress an approval rating of only 13 percent, expressing frustration with the lack of compromise, but the group may not have been able to function well partly because of the need for consensus in the face of partisanship.

If consensus is reached, does that mean the decision is the right one? Critics of consensus-based methods ar- gue that any decisions ultimately reached are inferior to decisions using other methods such as voting or having team members provide input to their leader, who then makes the final decision. Critics also argue that because of pressures to conform, groupthink is much more likely, and decisions reached through consensus are simply those everyone dislikes the least.

Questions 9-28. Is consensus a good way for groups to make deci-

sions? Why or why not? 9-29. Can you think of a time when a group of which you

were a part relied on consensus? How do you think the decision turned out?

9-30. Martin Luther King Jr. once proclaimed, “A genuine leader is not a seeker of consensus but a modeler of consensus.” What do you think he meant by that statement? Do you agree with it? Why or why not?

Sources: D. Leonhardt, “When the Crowd Isn’t Wise,” The New York Times, July 8, 2012, SR BW 4; and K. Jensen, “Consensus Is Poison! Who’s with Me?” Forbes, May 20, 2013, downloaded on May 30, 2013, from www.forbes.com.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 305

case inciDent 2 Intragroup Trust and Survival When 10 British Army soldiers on a 10-day training exer- cise descended into Low’s Gully, a narrow chasm that cuts through Mt. Kinabalu in Borneo, each knew “the golden rule for such expeditions—never split up.” Yet, the fit- test three struggled out of the jungle with a concussion, malaria, and infected wounds 19 days later; two more terri- bly ill soldiers found a village the next day; and the remain- ing five emaciated and injured men were rescued from a cave by a helicopter on day 33. What happened?

On a surface level, the near-tragic fracturing of the group began with a logical division of labor, according to the training’s initiators, Lieutenant Colonel Neill and Major Foster:

Because the group would be one of mixed abilities, and the young British and NCOs [non-commissioned officers] were likely to be fitter and more experienced than the Hong Kong soldiers, the team would work in two halves on the harder phases of the descent. The British, taking ad- vantage of Mayfield’s expertise (in rock climbing), would set up ropes on the difficult sections, while he [Neill] and Foster would concentrate on bringing the Hong Kong soldiers down. Every now and then the recce (reconnais- sance) party would report back, and the expedition would go on down in one unit until another reconnaissance party became necessary.

The men reported that from then on, perilous climb- ing conditions, debilitating sickness, and monsoon rains permanently divided the group. A review board found differently, blaming Neill’s and Foster’s leadership and their decision to take some less-experienced soldiers on the exercise.

No rulings were made about the near-catastrophic decision to divide the group, but closer inquiries show that this temporary workgroup of diverse members who were not previously acquainted started out with a high level of intragroup trust that dissolved over time. The resulting faultlines, based on members’ similarities and differences and the establishment of ad hoc leaders, may have been inevitable.

Initially, all group members shared the common ground of soldier training, clear roles, and volunteer commitment to the mission. When the leaders ignored the soldiers’ con- cerns about the severity of conditions, lack of preparation,

and low level of communication, however, trust issues divided the group into subgroups. The initial reconnais- sance party established common ground and trust that al- lowed them to complete the mission and reach safety, even though they divided yet again. Meanwhile, the main group that stayed with the leaders in the cave under conditions of active distrust fractured further.

We will never know whether it would have been better to keep the group together. However, we do know that this small group of soldiers trained to stay together for survival fractured into at least four subgroups because they didn’t trust their leaders or their group, endangering all their lives.

Questions 9-31. How was the common ground established by the

reconnaissance subgroups different from the com- mon ground established by the cave subgroups? See the leaders’ description.

9-32. Do you think the group should have fractured as it did? Why or why not?

9-33. When the exercise was designed, Neill created a buddy system based on similarity of soldiers’ backgrounds (rank, unit, age, fitness, skills level). The first group out of the jungle were assigned buddies and one other: two lance corporals and one corporal from the same unit (regular army); ages 24–26 with good fitness levels; all top roping and abseiling (TR&A) instructors. The second group out were assigned buddies: a sergeant and a lance corporal from the same unit (elite regular army); ages 25 and 37; good fitness levels; both with Commando Brigade skills. The group left in the cave split into: a lieutenant colonel and a ma- jor (buddies); one from the regular army and one from the part time territorial army; ages 46 and 54; fair fitness level; one TR&A and one ski instructor. The second faction was the three from the Hong Kong unit—a lance corporal and two privates, all from the Hong Kong unit; ages 24–32; fair to good fitness levels; one with jungle training and two novices. Would you have set up the buddy system Neill did? Why or why not, and if not, what would you have changed?

Sources: M. A. Korsgaard, H. H. Brower, and S. W. Lester, “It Isn’t Always Mutual: A Critical Review of Dyadic Trust,” Journal of Management 41, no. 1 (2014): 47–70; R. L. Priem and P. C. Nystrom, “Exploring the Dynamics of Workgroup Fracture: Common Ground, Trust-with-Trepidation, and Warranted Distrust,” Journal of Management 40, no. 3 (2014): 764–95; and “The Call of Malaysia’s ‘Con- querable’ Mount Kinabalu,” BBC, June 5, 2015, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33020356.

306 PART 3 The Group

enDnOtes 1E. J. Boothby, M. S. Clark, and J. A. Bargh, “Shared Experiences are Amplified,” Psycho- logical Science 25, no. 12 (2014): 2209–16. 2B. Bastien, J. Jetten, and L. J. Ferris, “Pain as Social Glue: Shared Pain Increases Coopera- tion,” Psychological Science 25, no. 11 (2014): 2079–85. 3N. Karelaia and L. Guillen, “Me, a Woman and a Leader: Positive Social Identity and Identity Conflict,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 125, no. 2 (2014): 204–19. 4P. Belmi, R. C. Barragan, M. A. Neale, and G. L. Cohen, “Threats to Social Identity Can Trigger Social Deviance,” Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin 41, no. 4 (2015): 467–84. 5H. Takahashi, M. Kato, M. Matsuura, D. Mobbs, T. Suhara, and Y. Okubo, “When Your Gain Is My Pain and Your Pain Is My Gain: Neural Correlates of Envy and Schaden- freude,” Science 323, no. 5916 (2009): 937–39; and C. W. Leach, R. Spears, N. R. Brans- combe, and B. Doosje, “Malicious Pleasure: Schadenfreude at the Suffering of Another Group,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy 84, no. 5 (2003): 932–43. 6O. Yakushko, M. M. Davidson, and E. N. Wil- liams, “Identity Salience Model: A Paradigm for Integrating Multiple Identities in Clinical Practice,” Psychotherapy 46, no. 2 (2009): 180–92; and S. M. Toh and A. S. Denisi, “Host Country Nationals as Socializing Agents: A Social Identity Approach,” Journal of Organiza- tional Behavior 28, no. 3 (2007): 281–301. 7N. Karelaia and L. Guillen, “Me, a Woman and a Leader: Positive Social Identity and Identity Conflict.” 8T. Cruwys, E. I. South, K. H. Greenaway, and S. A. Haslam, “Social Identity Reduces Depres- sion by Fostering Positive Attributions,” Social Psychological and Personality Science 6, no. 1 (2015): 65–74. 9T. Schmader, K. Block, and B. Lickel, “Social Identity Threat in Response to Stereotypic Film Portrayals: Effects on Self-Conscious Emotion and Implicit Ingroup Attitudes,” Jour- nal of Social Issues 71, no. 1 (2015): 54–72. 10S. Zhang, G. Chen, X.-P. Chen, D. Liu, and M. D. Johnson, “Relational versus Collective

Identification within Workgroups: Concep- tualization, Measurement Development, and Nomological Network Building,” Journal of Management 40, no. 6 (2014): 1700–31. 11G. J. Lewis and T. C. Bates, “Common Heritable Effects Underpin Concerns over Norm Maintenance and In-Group Favoritism: Evidence from Genetic Analyses of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Traditionalism,” Journal of Personality 82, no. 4 (2014): 297–309. 12S. L. Neuberg, C. M. Warner, S. A. Mistler, A. Berlin, E. D. Hill, J. D. Johnson, J. Schober, et al., “Religion and Intergroup Conflict: Findings from the Global Group Relations Project,” Psychological Science 25, no. 1 (2014): 198–206. 13W. M. L. Finlay, “Denunciation and the Construction of Norms in Group Conflict: Examples from and Al-Qaeda-Supporting Group,” British Journal of Social Psychology 53, no. 4 (2014): 691–710. 14T. C. Dennehy, A. Ben-Zeev, and N. Tanigawa, “‘Be Prepared’: An Implemental Mindset for Alleviating Social-Identity Threat,” British Jour- nal of Social Psychology 53 (2014): 585–94. 15M. J. Garfield and A. R. Denis, “Toward an Integrated Model of Group Development: Dis- ruption of Routines by Technology-Induced Change,” Journal of Management Information Systems 29, no. 3 (2012): 43–86; M. J. Waller, J. M. Conte, C. B. Gibson, and M. A. Carpenter, “The Effect of Individual Perceptions of Dead- lines on Team Performance,” Academy of Man- agement Review (October 2001): 586–600; and A. Chang, P. Bordia, and J. Duck, “Punctuated Equilibrium and Linear Progression: Toward a New Understanding of Group Development,” Academy of Management Journal (February 2003): 106–17. 16M. M. Kazmer, “Disengaging from a Dis- tributed Research Project: Refining a Model of Group Departures,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (April 2010): 758–71. 17K. Giese and A. Thiel, “The Psychological Contract in Chinese-African Informal Labor Relations,” International Journal of Human Re- source Management 26, no. 14 (2015): 1807–26; L. Sels, M. Janssens, and I. Van den Brande,

“Assessing the Nature of Psychological Con- tracts: A Validation of Six Dimensions,” Journal of Organizational Behavior (June 2004): 461–88; and C. Hui, C. Lee, and D. M. Rousseau, “Psychological Contract and Organizational Citizenship Behavior in China: Investigating Generalizability and Instrumentality,” Journal of Applied Psychology (April 2004): 311–21. 18M. D. Collins, “The Effect of Psychological Contract Fulfillment on Manager Turnover Intentions and Its Role as a Mediator in a Casual, Limited-Service Restaurant Environ- ment,” International Journal of Hospitality Man- agement 29, no. 4 (2010): 736–42; J. M. Jensen, R. A. Opland, and A. M. Ryan, “Psychological Contracts and Counterproductive Work Be- haviors: Employee Responses to Transactional and Relational Breach,” Journal of Business and Psychology 25, no. 4 (2010): 555–68. 19D. C. Thomas, S. R. Fitzimmons, E. C. Rav- lin, K. Y. Au, B. Z. Ekelund, and C. Barzantny, “Psychological Contracts across Cultures,” Organization Studies 31 (2010): 1437–58. 20K. S. Wilson and H. M. Baumann, “Captur- ing a More Complete View of Employees’ Lives outside of Work: The Introduction and Development of New Interrole Conflict Con- structs,” Personnel Psychology 68, no. 2 (2015): 235–82. 21Ibid. 22See, for example, F. T. Amstad, L L. Meier, U. Fasel, A. Elfering, and N. K. Semmer, “A Meta-Analysis of Work-Family Conflict and Various Outcomes with a Special Emphasis on Cross-Domain Versus Matching-Domain Relations,” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 16, no. 2 (2011): 151–69. 23K. S. Wilson and H. M. Baumann, “Captur- ing a More Complete View of Employees’ Lives outside of Work: The Introduction and Development of New Interrole Conflict Constructs.” 24D. Vora and T. Kostova. “A Model of Dual Organizational Identification in the Context of the Multinational Enterprise,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 28 (2007): 327–50. 25C. Reade, “Dual Identification in Multinational Corporations: Local Manag- ers and Their Psychological Attachment

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

9-34. Considering Case Incident 1, what are some ways groups can improve the effectiveness of consensus methods to make decisions?

9-35. After reading Case Incident 2, do you feel subgroups are good or bad? Why or why not? What might be the alternative?

9-36. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 307

to the  Subsidiary versus the Global Orga- nization,” International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12, no. 3 (2001): 405–24. 26S. Drury, S. A. Hutchens, D. E. Shuttles- worth, and C. L. White, “Philip G. Zimbardo on His Career and the Stanford Prison Experi- ment’s 40th Anniversary,” History of Psychology 15, no. 2 (2012): 161–70; and S. A. Haslam and S. D. Reicher, “Contesting the ‘Nature’ of Conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s Studies Really Show,” Plos Biology 10, no. 11 (2012): e1001426. 27S. A. Haslam and S. Reicher, “Stress- ing the Group: Social Identity and the Unfolding Dynamics of Responses to Stress,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 5 (2006): 1037–52; S. Reicher and S. A. Haslam, “Rethinking the Psychology of Tyranny: The BBC Prison Study,” British Journal of Social Psychology 45, no. 1 (2006): 1–40; and P. G. Zimbardo, “On Rethinking the Psychology of Tyranny: The BBC Prison Study,” British Journal of Social Psychology 45, no. 1 (2006): 47–53. 28Y. Huang, K. M. Kendrick, and R. Yu, “Conformity to the Opinions of Other People Lasts for No More Than 3 Days,” Psychological Science 25, no. 7 (2014): 1388–93. 29M. S. Hagger, P. Rentzelas, and N. K. D. Chatzisrantis, “Effects of Individualist and Collectivist Group Norms and Choice on Intrinsic Motivation,” Motivation and Emotion 38, no. 2 (2014): 215–23; and M. G. Ehrhart and S. E. Naumann, “Organizational Citizen- ship Behavior in Work Groups: A Group Norms Approach,” Journal of Applied Psychology (December 2004): 960–74. 30E. Delvaux, N. Vanbeselaere, and B. Mes- quita, “Dynamic Interplay between Norms and Experiences of Anger and Gratitude in Groups,” Small Group Research 46, no. 3 (2015): 300–23. 31R. B. Cialdini and N. J. Goldstein, “Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity,” Annual Review of Psychology 55 (2004): 591–621. 32P. Kundu and D. D. Cummins, “Morality and Conformity: The Asch Paradigm Applied to Moral Decisions,” Social Influence 8, no. 4 (2013): 268–79. 33Ibid. 34R. A. Griggs, “The Disappearance of Inde- pendence in Textbook Coverage of Asch’s Social Pressure Experiments,” Teaching of Psychology 42, no. 2 (2015): 137–42. 35S. Sansfacon and C. E. Amiot, “The Impact of Group Norms and Behavioral Congruence on the Internalization of an Illegal Download- ing Behavior,” Group Dynamics-Theory Research and Practice 18, no. 2 (2014): 174–88; and L. Rosh, L. R. Offermann, and R. Van Diest, “Too Close for Comfort? Distinguishing between Team Intimacy and Team Cohesion,” Human Resource Management Review (June 2012): 116–27.

36J. S. Hassard, “Rethinking the Hawthorne Studies: The Western Electric Research in Its Social, Political, and Historical Context,” Hu- man Relations 65, no. 11 (2012): 1431–61. 37J. A. Goncalo, J. A. Chatman, M. M. Duguid, and J. A. Kennedy, “Creativity from Con- straint? How the Political Correctness Norm Influences Creativity in Mixed-Sex Work Groups,” Administrative Science Quarterly 60, no. 1 (2015): 1–30. 38E. Gonzalez-Mule, D. S. DeGeest, B. W. McCormick, et al., “Can We Get Some Coop- eration Around Here? The Mediating Role of Group Norms on the Relationship between Team Personality and Individual Helping Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 5 (2014): 988–99. 39T. Masson and I. Fritsche, “Adherence to Climate Change-Related Ingroup Norms: Do Dimensions of Group Identification Matter?” European Journal of Social Psychology 44, no. 5 (2014): 455–65. 40See R. J. Bennett and S. L. Robinson, “The Past, Present, and Future of Workplace Deviance,” in J. Greenberg (ed.), Organiza- tional Behavior: The State of the Science, 2nd ed. (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2003), 237–71; and C. M. Berry, D. S. Ones, and P. R. Sackett, “Inter- personal Deviance, Organizational Deviance, and Their Common Correlates: A Review and Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 2 (2007): 410–24. 41M. A. Baysinger, K. T. Scherer, and J. M. LeBreton, “Exploring the Disruptive Effects of Psychopathy and Aggression on Group Processes and Group Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 1 (2014): 48–65. 42T. C. Reich and M. S. Hershcovis, “Observ- ing Workplace Incivility,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 203–15; and Z. E. Zhou, Y. Yan, X. X. Che, and L. L. Meier, “Effect of Workplace Incivility on End-of-Work Negative Affect: Examining Individual and Organizational Moderators in a Daily Diary Study,” Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 20, no. 1 (2015): 117–30. 43See C. Pearson, L. M. Andersson, and C. L. Porath, “Workplace Incivility,” in S. Fox and P. E. Spector (eds.), Counterproductive Work Behavior: Investigations of Actors and Targets (Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2005), 177–200. 44S. Lim, L. M. Cortina, and V. J. Magley, “Personal and Workgroup Incivility: Impact on Work and Health Outcomes,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 1 (2008): 95–107. 45M. S. Christian and A. P. J. Ellis, “Examining the Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Work- place Deviance: A Self-Regulatory Perspec- tive,” Academy of Management Journal 54, no. 5 (2011): 913–34. 46Robinson and O’Leary-Kelly, “Monkey See, Monkey Do”; and T. M. Glomb and H. Liao, “Interpersonal Aggression in Workgroups: Social Influence, Reciprocal, and Individual

Effects,” Academy of Management Journal 46 (2003): 486–96. 47P. Bamberger and M. Biron, “Group Norms and Excessive Absenteeism: The Role of Peer Referent Others,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103, no. 2 (2007): 179–96; and A. Väänänen, N. Tordera, M. Kivimäki, A. Kouvonen, J. Pentti, A. Linna, and J. Vahtera, “The Role of Work Group in Individual Sickness Absence Behavior,” Journal of Health & Human Behavior 49, no. 4 (2008): 452–67. 48M. S. Cole, F. Walter, and H. Bruch, “Af- fective Mechanisms Linking Dysfunctional Behavior to Performance in Work Teams: A Moderated Mediation Study,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 5 (2008): 945–58. 49M. S. Hagger, P. Rentzelas, and N. K. D. Chatzisrantis, “Effects of Individualist and Col- lectivist Group Norms and Choice on Intrinsic Motivation.” 50J. Dippong and W. Kalkhoff, “Predicting Performance Expectations from Affective Im- pressions: Linking Affect Control Theory and Status Characteristics Theory,” Social Science Research 50 (2015): 1–14; and A. E. Randel, L. Chay-Hoon, and P. C. Earley, “It’s Not Just about Differences: An Integration of Role Identity Theory and Status Characteristics Theory,” in M. C. T. Hunt (ed.), Research on Managing Groups and Teams (2005), 23–42. 51A. E. Randel, L. Chay-Hoon, and P. C. Earley, “It’s Not Just about Differences: An Integration of Role Identity Theory and Status Characteristics Theory.” 52R. R. Callister and J. A. Wall Jr., “Conflict across Organizational Boundaries: Managed Care Organizations versus Health Care Providers,” Journal of Applied Psychology 86, no. 4 (2001): 754–63; and P. Chattopadhyay, W. H. Glick, and G. P. Huber, “Organizational Actions in Response to Threats and Oppor- tunities,” Academy of Management Journal 44, no. 5 (2001): 937–55. 53P. F. Hewlin, “Wearing the Cloak: Anteced- ents and Consequences of Creating Facades of Conformity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 3 (2009): 727–41. 54B. Groysberg, J. T. Polzer, and H. A. Elfenbein, “Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth: How High-Status Individuals Decrease Group Effectiveness,” Organization Science (May–June 2011): 722–37. 55C. Bendersky and N. P. Shah, “The Cost of Status Enhancement: Performance Effects of Individuals’ Status Mobility in Task Groups,” Organization Science 23, no. 2 (2012): 308–22. 56B. Groysberg, J. T. Polzer, and H. A. Elfenbein, “Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth: How High-Status Individuals Decrease Group Effectiveness,” Organization Science 22, no. 3 (2011): 722–37. 57A. M. Christie and J. Barling, “Beyond Sta- tus: Relating Status Inequality to Performance and Health in Teams,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 5 (2010): 920–34; and

308 PART 3 The Group

L. H. Nishii and D. M. Mayer, “Do Inclusive Leaders Help to Reduce Turnover in Diverse Groups? The Moderating Role of Leader- Member Exchange in the Diversity to Turn- over Relationship,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 6 (2009): 1412–26. 58V. Venkataramani, S. G. Green, and D. J. Schleicher, “Well-Connected Leaders: The Impact of Leaders’ Social Network Ties on LMX and Members’ Work Attitudes,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 6 (2010): 1071–84. 59H. van Dijk and M. L. van Engen, “A Status Perspective on the Consequences of Work Group Diversity,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (June 2013): 223–41. 60Based on J. B. Pryor, G. D. Reeder, and A. E. Monroe, “The Infection of Bad Company: Stigma by Association,” Journal of Personal- ity and Social Psychology. 102, no. 2 (2012): 224–41; E. Goffman, Stigma: Notes on the Man- agement of Spoiled Identity (Touchstone Digital, 2009); and M. R. Hebl, and L. M. Mannix, “The Weight of Obesity in Evaluating Others: A Mere Proximity Effect,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29 (2003): 28–38. 61M. Cikara and J. J. Van Bavel, “The Neuro- science of Intergroup Relations: An Integra- tive Review,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 3 (2014): 245–74. 62M. Rubin, C. Badea, and J. Jetten, “Low Sta- tus Groups Show In-Group Favoritism to Com- pensate for Their Low Status and Compete for Higher Status,” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 17, no. 5 (2014): 563–76. 63C. L. Wilkins, J. D. Wellman, L. G. Babbitt, N. R. Toosi, and K. D. Schad, “You Can Win but I Can’t Lose: Bias against High-Status Groups Increases Their Zero-Sum Beliefs about Discrimination,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 57 (2014): 1–14. 64R. B. Lount, Jr. and S. L. Wilk, “Working Harder or Hardly Working? Posting Perfor- mance Eliminates Social Loafing and Pro- motes Social Laboring in Workgroups,” Man- agement Science 60, no. 5 (2014): 1098–106; S. M. Murphy, S. J. Wayne, R. C. Liden, and B. Erdogan, “Understanding Social Loafing: The Role of Justice Perceptions and Exchange Relationships,” Human Relations (January 2003): 61–84; and R. C. Liden, S. J. Wayne, R. A. Jaworski, and N. Bennett, “Social Loafing: A Field Investigation,” Journal of Management (April 2004): 285–304. 65A. W. Delton, L. Cosmides, M. Guemo, T. E. Robertson, and J. Tooby, “The Psy-

chosemantics of Free Riding: Dissecting the Architecture of a Moral Concept,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102, no. 6 (2012): 1252–70. 66C. Rubino, D. R. Avery, S. D. Volpone, et al., “Does Teaming Obscure Low Performance? Exploring the Temporal Effects of Team Per- formance Diversity,” Human Performance 27, no. 5 (2014): 416–34. 67D. L. Smrt and S. J. Karau, “Protestant Work Ethic Moderates Social Loafing,” Group Dynamics-Theory Research and Practice (Septem- ber 2011): 267–74. 68M. C. Schippers, “Social Loafing Tendencies and Team Performance: The Compensating Effect of Agreeableness and Conscientious- ness,” Academy of Management Learning & Education 13, no. 1 (2014): 62–81. 69A. Gunnthorsdottir and A. Rapoport, “Em- bedding Social Dilemmas in Intergroup Com- petition Reduces Free-Riding,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 101 (2006): 184–99; and E. M. Stark, J. D. Shaw, and M. K. Duffy, “Preference for Group Work, Winning Orientation, and Social Loafing Behavior in Groups,” Group and Organization Management 32, no. 6 (2007): 699–723. 70R. B. Lount, Jr. and S. L. Wilk, “Working Harder or Hardly Working? Posting Perfor- mance Eliminates Social Loafing and Pro- motes Social Laboring in Workgroups.” 71A. Gunnthorsdottir and A. Rapoport, “Embedding Social Dilemmas in Intergroup Competition Reduces Free-Riding;” and E. M. Stark, J. D. Shaw, and M. K. Duffy, “Preference for Group Work, Winning Orientation, and Social Loafing Behavior in Groups.” 72L. L. Greer, “Group Cohesion: Then and Now,” Small Group Research (December 2012): 655–61. 73D. S. Staples and L. Zhao, “The Effects of Cultural Diversity in Virtual Teams Versus Face-to-Face Teams,” Group Decision and Nego- tiation (July 2006): 389–406. 74N. Chi, Y. Huang, and S. Lin, “A Double- Edged Sword? Exploring the Curvilinear Relationship between Organizational Tenure Diversity and Team Innovation: The Moderat- ing Role of Team-Oriented HR Practices,” Group and Organization Management 34, no. 6 (2009): 698–726. 75K. J. Klein, A. P. Knight, J. C. Ziegert, B. C. Lim, and J. L. Saltz, “When Team Members’ Values Differ: The Moderating Role of Team Leadership,” Organizational Behavior and

Human Decision Processes 114, no. 1 (2011): 25–36; and G. Park and R. P. DeShon, “A Multilevel Model of Minority Opinion Expres- sion and Team Decision-Making Effective- ness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 5 (2010): 824–33. 76J. S. Chun and J. N. Choi, “Members’ Needs, Intragroup Conflict, and Group Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 3 (2014): 437–50. 77M. Rigoglioso, “Diverse Backgrounds and Personalities Can Strengthen Groups,” Stanford Knowledgebase, August 15, 2006, www .stanford.edu/group/knowledgebase/. 78K. W. Phillips and D. L. Loyd, “When Surface and Deep-Level Diversity Collide: The Effects on Dissenting Group Members,” Orga- nizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 99 (2006): 143–60; and S. R. Sommers, “On Racial Diversity and Group Decision Mak- ing: Identifying Multiple Effects of Racial Composition on Jury Deliberations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (April 2006): 597–612. 79J. S. Chun and J. N. Choi, “Members’ Needs, Intragroup Conflict, and Group Perfor- mance.” 80E. Mannix and M. A. Neale, “What Dif- ferences Make a Difference? The Promise and Reality of Diverse Teams in Organiza- tions,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest (October 2005): 31–55. 81E. P. Apfelbaum, K. W. Phillips, and J. A. Richeson, “Rethinking the Baseline in Diversity Research: Should We Be Explaining the Effects of Homogeneity?” Perspectives on Psychological Science 9, no. 3 (2014): 235–44. 82See M. B. Thatcher and P. C. Patel, “Group Faultlines: A Review, Integration, and Guide to Future Research,” Journal of Management 38, no. 4 (2012): 969–1009. 83K. Bezrukova, S. M. B. Thatcher, K. A. Jehn, and C. S. Spell, “The Effects of Alignments: Examining Group Faultlines, Organizational Cultures, and Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 1 (2012): 77–92. 84R. Rico, M. Sanchez-Manzanares, M. Antino, and D. Lau, “Bridging Team Faultlines by Combining Task Role Assignment and Goal Structure Strategies,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 97, no. 2 (2012): 407–20. 85B. L. Bonner, S. D. Sillito, and M. R. Baumann, “Collective Estimation: Accuracy, Expertise, and Extroversion as Sources of Intra-Group Influence,” Organizational

Foundations of Group Behavior CHAPTER 9 309

Behavior and Human Decision Processes 103 (2007): 121–33. 86J. E. Kammer, W. Gaissmaier, T. Reimer, and C. C. Schermuly, “The Adaptive Use of Recog- nition in Group Decision Making,” Cognitive Science 38, no. 5 (2014): 911–42. 87J. S. Chun and J. N. Choi, “Members’ Needs, Intragroup Conflict, and Group Perfor- mance.” 88G. Park and R. P. DeShon, “A Multilevel Model of Minority Opinion Expression and Team Decision-Making Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 5 (2010): 824–33. 89R. Benabou, “Groupthink: Collective Delu- sions in Organizations and Markets,” Review of Economic Studies (April 2013): 429–62. 90J. A. Goncalo, E. Polman, and C. Maslach, “Can Confidence Come Too Soon? Collective Efficacy, Conflict, and Group Performance over Time,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 113, no. 1 (2010): 13–24.

91See N. Richardson Ahlfinger and J. K. Esser, “Testing the Groupthink Model: Effects of Promotional Leadership and Conformity Predisposition,” Social Behavior & Personality 29, no. 1 (2001): 31–41; and S. Schultz-Hardt, F. C. Brodbeck, A. Mojzisch, R. Kerschreiter, and D. Frey, “Group Decision Making in Hid- den Profile Situations: Dissent as a Facilitator for Decision Quality,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 91, no. 6 (2006): 1080–93. 92See I. Yaniv, “Group Diversity and Decision Quality: Amplification and Attenuation of the Framing Effect,” International Journal of Fore- casting (January–March 2011): 41–49. 93M. P. Brady and S. Y. Wu, “The Aggregation of Preferences in Groups: Identity, Respon- sibility, and Polarization,” Journal of Economic Psychology 31, no. 6 (2010): 950–63. 94Z. Krizan and R. S. Baron, “Group Polariza- tion and Choice-Dilemmas: How Important Is Self-Categorization?” European Journal of Social Psychology 37, no. 1 (2007): 191–201.

95See R. P. McGlynn, D. McGurk, V. S. Effland, N. L. Johll, and D. J. Harding, “Brainstorming and Task Performance in Groups Constrained by Evidence,” Organiza- tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes (January 2004): 75–87; and R. C. Litchfield, “Brainstorming Reconsidered: A Goal-Based View,” Academy of Management Review 33, no. 3 (2008): 649–68. 96N. L. Kerr and R. S. Tindale, “Group Perfor- mance and Decision-Making,” Annual Review of Psychology 55 (2004): 623–55. 97C. Faure, “Beyond Brainstorming: Effects of Different Group Procedures on Selection of Ideas and Satisfaction with the Process,” Journal of Creative Behavior 38 (2004): 13–34. 98P. L. Perrewe, K. L. Zellars, G. R. Ferris, A. M. Rossi, C. J. Kacmar, and D. A. Ralston, “Neutralizing Job Stressors: Political Skill as an Antidote to the Dysfunctional Consequences of Role Conflict,” Academy of Management Journal (February 2004): 141–52.

S ou

rc e:

J .

S co

tt P

ar k/

M Li

ve .c

om /L

an do

v

Understanding Work Teams10

310

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 311

Teams ThaT Play TogeTher sTay TogeTher

At SmugMug, an online photo sharing company, every day is a photo op-portunity. If you’re hired there, you might be expected to enjoy photog- raphy, have extensive Web knowledge, and be willing to work

in teams. You might even be expected to become a subject in

photos the organization posts. But would you anticipate hav-

ing to crawl through muddy trenches under barbed wire with

your team as these employees have? They’ve just finished the hard-core 10–12-mile obstacle course experience provided by

Tough Mudder, an organization that creates physical challeng-

es for organizational teams like those at SmugMug.

The mission of Tough Mudder is simple: solidify teams

through a shared experience. Co-founder Chris MacAskill said,

“You get muddy and tired and beat up. It is like the Marines and boot camp. The more athletic help the less athletic because

you want to finish together as a team. At the end, you are arm

in arm, and there are big smiles and high-fives.” Tough Mudder

events like the one pictured here teach values like mental grit

by providing fun, success, and thrills. It seems to work, according to Lynn

Gruber of Fortune, who remarked, “The teamwork and camaraderie out

there was amazing.” To date, the organization boasts a track record of over

100 events, 1.5 million participants, 4,000 Tough Mudder tattoos, and a 95 percent participation rate.

10-1 Analyze the continued popularity of teams in organizations.

10-2 Contrast groups and teams.

10-3 Contrast the five types of team arrangements.

10-4 Identify the characteristics of effective teams.

10-5 Explain how organizations can create team players.

10-6 Decide when to use individuals instead of teams.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

312 PART 3 The Group

Is Tough Mudding not your cup of tea? Then perhaps you should con-

sider employment at Grid Connect Inc., a software firm in Illinois. The game

there is ping pong, and “Everybody plays, nobody can opt out. You can

take your frustrations out playing ping pong. When you aren’t playing, you

can root for the underdogs,” said founder and CEO Mike Justice. He is the

trophy holder and his father is the official scorekeeper, but still, he says,

the organization’s tournaments enhance team building for his employees. “It’s a real confidence booster. It was one of the best things we ever did

for morale.”

Perhaps old-fashioned athletic leagues are more your thing? Most com-

panies have leagues for organized sports, which may or may not enhance

their work teams. At Offerpop, a social-marketing firm, “The sports teams

help to make everyone more comfortable with each other,” said CEO Wen-

dell Landsford, although he says the real team building happens during

postgame drinks. Jerry Schranz of public-relations agency Beckerman per-

sonally learned an important job skill while captain of the softball team. He observed, “It is very difficult to give up the ball as a starting pitcher, where

you think that no one can pitch as well as you. It was something I had to

learn to do: delegate to others and let it unfold.”

For all the good that intentional team-building recreation can do, note

that programs such as Tough Mudder’s may be more successful than off-

hours sports leagues. John Pinkham of PAN Communications Inc. was in

charge of the Boston PR firm’s casual soccer team. He said, “Turns out the fun league we signed up for was super competitive, with ex-college players

and Europeans who kicked the ball faster than I thought was possible.” In

response, losers either tried to out-strategize the perpetual winners or quit.

Those that stayed tried to have fun no matter the score. Pinkham said, “I

think everyone was glad they played, and it brought us more together as col-

leagues and friends—just maybe not as teammates.”

Sources: B. Haislip, “Play Ball!” The Wall Street Journal, June 12, 2014, R4; M. L. Shuffler, D. DiazGranados, and E. Salas, “There’s a Science for That: Team Development Interventions in Organizations,” Current Directions in Psychological Science 20, no. 6 (2011): 365–72; and Tough Mudder website, www.toughmudder.com, accessed June 23, 2015.

Do teams that play together stay together, as the opening discussion sug-gests? There is definitely an upside to shared experiences, as we will find in this chapter. There may also be something about unique, unexpected challenges that bring teams together, as Tough Mudder claims. We are, how- ever, cautioned to consider the effects of these “play” exercises, including possible discrimination against employees who are disabled or physically unfit. We will consider more types of team-building strategies, and teams in general, in this chapter.

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 313

Why Have Teams Become So Popular? Why are teams popular? In short, because we believe they are effective. “A team of people happily committed to the project and to one another will outper- form a brilliant individual every time,” writes Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard.1 In some ways, he’s right. Teams can sometimes achieve feats an individual could never accomplish.2 Teams are more flexible and responsive to changing events than traditional departments or other forms of permanent groupings. They can quickly assemble, deploy, refocus, and disband. They are an effective means to democratize organizations and increase employee involvement. And finally, research indicates that our involvement in teams positively shapes the way we think as individuals, introducing a collaborative mindset about even our per- sonal decision making.3

The fact that organizations have embraced teamwork doesn’t necessarily mean teams are always effective. Team members, as humans, can be swayed by fads and herd mentality that can lead them astray from the best decisions. What conditions affect their potential? How do members work together? Do we even like teams? Maybe not, according to the OB Poll. To answer these questions, let’s first distinguish between groups and teams.

Differences Between Groups and Teams Groups and teams are not the same thing. In Chapter 9, we defined a group as two or more individuals, interacting and interdependent, who work together to achieve particular objectives. A workgroup is a group that interacts primarily to share information and make decisions to help each member perform within his or her area of responsibility.

Workgroups have no need or opportunity to engage in collective work with joint effort, so the group’s performance is merely the summation of each mem- ber’s individual contribution. There is no positive synergy that would create an overall level of performance greater than the sum of the inputs. A workgroup

10-1 Analyze the continued popularity of teams in organizations.

10-2 Contrast groups and teams. workgroup A group that interacts primarily to share information and to make decisions to help each group member perform within his or her area of responsibility.

Ob POLL is teamwork a good thing?

Source: “University of Phoenix Survey Reveals Nearly Seven-in-Ten Workers Have Been Part of Dysfunctional Teams,” downloaded on June 9, 2013, from

www.prnewswire.com

Teams serve an important function

Perfer to work in teams 25%

95%

0% 25% 50%

The percent who report . . .

75% 100%

314 PART 3 The Group

is a collection of individuals doing their work, albeit with interaction and/or dependency.

A work team, on the other hand, generates positive synergy through coordi- nation. The individual efforts result in a level of performance greater than the sum of the individual inputs.

In both workgroups and work teams, there are often behavioral expectations of members, collective normalization efforts, active group dynamics, and some level of decision making (even if just informally about the scope of member- ship). Both may generate ideas, pool resources, or coordinate logistics such as work schedules; for the workgroup, however, this effort will be limited to information-gathering for decision makers outside the group.

Whereas we can think of a work team as a subset of a workgroup, the team is constructed to be purposeful (symbiotic) in its member interaction. The dis- tinction between a workgroup and a work team should be kept even when the terms are mentioned interchangeably in differing contexts. Exhibit 10-1 high- lights the differences between them.

The definitions help clarify why organizations structure work processes by teams. Management is looking for positive synergy that will create increased performance. The extensive use of teams creates the potential for an organi- zation to generate greater outputs with no increase in employee headcount. Notice, however, that we said potential. There is nothing magical that ensures the achievement of positive synergy in the creation of teams. Merely calling a group a team doesn’t automatically improve its performance. As we show later, effec- tive teams have certain common characteristics. If management hopes to gain increases in organizational performance through the use of teams, their teams must possess these characteristics.

Types of Teams Teams can make products, provide services, negotiate deals, coordinate proj- ects, offer advice, and make decisions.4 In this section, first we describe four common types of teams in organizations: problem-solving teams, self-managed work teams, cross-functional teams, and virtual teams (see Exhibit 10-2). Then we will discuss multiteam systems, which utilize a “team of teams” and are becoming increasingly widespread as work increases in complexity.

work team A group whose individual efforts result in performance that is greater than the sum of the individual inputs.

10-3 Contrast the five types of team arrangements.

Comparing Workgroups and Work TeamsExhibit 10-1

Share information

Neutral (sometimes negative)

Individual

Random and varied

Goal

Synergy

Accountability

Skills

Workgroups Work Teams

Collective performance

Positive

Individual and mutual

Complementary

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 315

Problem-solving Teams Quality-control teams have been in use for many years. Originally seen most often in manufacturing plants, these were permanent teams that generally met at a regular time, sometimes weekly or daily, to address quality standards and any problems with the products made. Also, the medical field in particular has recently implemented quality teams to improve their services in patient care. Problem-solving teams like these rarely have the authority to unilaterally imple- ment their suggestions, but if their recommendations are paired with imple- mentation processes, some significant improvements can be realized.

self-managed Work Teams As we discussed, problem-solving teams only make recommendations. Some or- ganizations have gone further and created teams that also implement solutions and take responsibility for outcomes.

Self-managed work teams are groups of employees (typically 10 to 15 in number) who perform highly related or interdependent jobs; these teams take on some supervisory responsibilities.5 Typically, the responsibilities include planning and scheduling work, assigning tasks to members, making operating decisions, taking action on problems, and working with suppliers and custom- ers. Fully self-managed work teams even select their own members who evaluate each other’s performance. When these teams are established, former supervi- sory positions take on decreased importance and are sometimes eliminated.

Research results on the effectiveness of self-managed work teams have not been uniformly positive. Some research indicates that self-managed teams may be more or less effective based on the degree to which team-promoting behav- iors are rewarded. For example, one study of 45 self-managing teams found that when team members perceived that economic rewards such as pay were dependent on input from their teammates, performance improved for both individuals and the team as a whole.6

A second area of research focus has been the impact of conflict on self-man- aged work team effectiveness. Some research indicates that self-managed teams are not effective when there is conflict. When disputes arise, members often stop cooperating and power struggles ensue, which lead to lower group perfor- mance.7 However, other research indicates that when members feel confident they can speak up without being embarrassed, rejected, or punished by other team members—in other words, when they feel psychologically safe—conflict can be beneficial and boost team performance.8

Thirdly, research has explored the effect of self-managed work teams on member behavior. Here again the findings are mixed. Although individuals on teams report higher levels of job satisfaction than other individuals, stud-

problem-solving teams Groups of 5 to 12 employees from the same department who meet for a few hours each week to discuss ways of improving quality, efficiency, and the work environment.

self-managed work teams Groups of 10 to 15 people who take on responsibilities of their former supervisors.

Four Types of TeamsExhibit 10-2

Problem-solving Self-managedP oblem sol ing

?

Self managed Cross-functional VirtualnctionalCross fun

Technology

316 PART 3 The Group

ies indicate they sometimes have higher absenteeism and turnover rates. One large-scale study of labor productivity in British establishments found that although using teams improved individual (and overall) labor productivity, no evidence supported the claim that self-managed teams performed better than traditional teams with less decision-making authority.9 On the whole, it appears that for self-managing teams to be advantageous, a number of facilitat- ing factors must be in place.

Cross-Functional Teams Starbucks created a team of individuals from production, global PR, global communications, and U.S. marketing to develop the Via brand of instant coffee. The team’s suggestions resulted in a product that would be cost-effective to produce and distribute, and that was marketed with a tightly integrated, mul- tifaceted strategy.10 This example illustrates the use of cross-functional teams, made up of employees from about the same hierarchical level but different work areas who come together to accomplish a task.

Cross-functional teams are an effective means of allowing people from diverse areas within or even between organizations to exchange information, develop new ideas, solve problems, and coordinate complex projects. How- ever, due to the high need for coordination, cross-functional teams are not simple to manage. First, it makes sense for power shifts to occur as different expertise is needed because the members are at roughly the same level in the organization, which creates leadership ambiguity. A climate of trust thus needs to be developed before shifts can happen without undue conflict.11 Second, the early stages of development are often long, since members need to learn to work with higher levels of diversity and complexity. Third, it takes time to build trust and teamwork, especially among people with different experiences and perspectives.

cross-functional teams Employees from about the same hierarchical level, but from different work areas, who come together to accomplish a task.

Harley-Davidson Motor Company uses cross-functional teams at all levels of its organization in creating new products, such as its first electric motorcycle, shown here. From product conception to launch, cross-functional teams include Harley employees from product planning, engineering, design, marketing, manufacturing, and purchasing. Source: Justin Lane/EPA/Newscom

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 317

Organizations have used horizontal, boundary-spanning teams for decades, and we would be hard-pressed to find a large organization or prod- uct launch that did not use them. Major automobile manufacturers—Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, GM, Ford, and Chrysler—currently use this form of team to coordinate complex projects, as do other industries. For example, Cisco relies on specific cross-functional teams to identify and capitalize on new trends in several areas of the software market. Its teams are the equiva- lent of social-networking groups that collaborate in real time to identify new business opportunities in the field and then implement them from the bot- tom up.12

In sum, the strength of traditional cross-functional teams is the collabora- tive effort of individuals with diverse skills from a variety of disciplines. When the unique perspectives of these members are considered, these teams can be very effective.

Virtual Teams The teams described in the preceding section do their work face-to-face, where- as virtual teams use computer technology to unite physically dispersed members and achieve a common goal.13 They collaborate online—using communication links such as wide-area networks, corporate social media, videoconferencing, and e-mail—whether members are nearby or continents apart. Nearly all teams do at least some of their work remotely.

Virtual teams should be managed differently than face-to-face teams in an office, partially because virtual team members may not interact along tradi- tional hierarchical patterns. Because of the complexity of interactions, research indicates that shared leadership of virtual teams may significantly enhance team performance, although the concept is still in development.14 For virtual teams to be effective, management should ensure that (1) trust is established among members (one inflammatory remark in an e-mail can severely undermine team trust), (2) progress is monitored closely (so the team doesn’t lose sight of its goals and no team member “disappears”), and (3) the efforts and products of the team are publicized throughout the organization (so the team does not become invisible).15

It would be a mistake to think virtual teams are an easy substitute for face-to- face teams. While the geographical reach and immediacy of online communi- cation make virtual teams a natural development, managers must make certain this type of team is the optimal choice for the desired outcome and then main- tain an oversight role throughout the collaboration.

multiteam systems The types of teams we’ve described so far are typically smaller, standalone teams, though their activities relate to the broader objectives of the organization. As tasks become more complex, teams often grow in size. Increases in team size are accompanied by higher coordination demands, creating a tipping point at which the addition of another member does more harm than good. To solve this problem, organizations use multiteam systems, collections of two or more interdependent teams that share a superordinate goal. In other words, mult- iteam systems are a “team of teams.”16

To picture a multiteam system, imagine the coordination of response needed after a major car accident. There is the emergency medical services team, which responds first and transports the injured to the hospital. An emergency room team then takes over, providing medical care, followed by a recovery team. Although the emergency services team, emergency room team, and recovery

virtual teams Teams that use computer technology to tie together physically dispersed members in order to achieve a common goal.

multiteam system A collection of two or more interdependent teams that share a superordinate goal; a team of teams.

318 PART 3 The Group

team are technically independent, their activities are interdependent, and the success of one depends on the success of the others. Why? Because they all share the higher goal of saving lives.

Some factors that make smaller, more traditional teams effective do not nec- essarily apply to multiteam systems and can even hinder their performance. One study showed that multiteam systems performed better when they had “boundary spanners” whose jobs were to coordinate with members of the other subteams. This reduced the need for some team member communication, which was helpful because it reduced coordination demands.17 Leadership of multiteam systems is also much different than for standalone teams. While lead- ership of all teams affects team performance, a multiteam leader must both facilitate coordination between teams and lead each team. Research indicated teams that received more attention and engagement from the organization’s leaders felt more empowered, which made them more effective as they sought to solve their own problems.18

In general, a multiteam system is the best choice either when a team has become too large to be effective, or when teams with distinct functions need to be highly coordinated.

Despite being in different coun-tries, or even on different conti-nents, many teams in geographi- cally dispersed locations communicate without regularly meeting face-to-face, and may never meet each other in per- son. Although the merits of face-to-face versus electronic communication have been debated, there may be a strong ethical argument for virtual teams.

Keeping team members where they are, as opposed to having them travel every time they need to meet, may be in line with corporate social responsibil- ity (CSR) initiatives. A very large propor- tion of airline, rail, and car transport is for business purposes and contributes greatly to global carbon dioxide emis- sions. When teams are able to meet virtually rather than face-to-face, they dra- matically reduce their carbon footprint.

In a globally connected world, how might you minimize your organization’s environmental impact from business travel? Several tips might get you started thinking about ways that virtual teams can be harnessed for greater sustainability:

1. Encourage all team members to think about whether a face-to-face meeting is really necessary. Try to utilize alternative communication methods whenever possible.

2. Communicate as much as possible through virtual means. This includes e-mail, telephone calls, and video- conferencing.

3. When traveling to team meetings, choose the most environmentally responsible travel methods pos- sible. Also, check the environmental

profile of hotels before booking rooms.

4. If the environmental savings are not enough motivation to reduce travel, consider the financial savings. According to one survey, businesses spend about 8 to 12 percent of their entire budget on travel. Communicating electronically can therefore result in two benefits: (1) it’s cheaper and (2) it’s good for the environment.

Sources: P. Tilstone, “Cut Carbon . . . and Bills,” Director, May 2009, 54; L. C. Lat- imer, “6 Strategies for Sustainable Busi- ness Travel,” Greenbiz, February 11, 2011, www.greenbiz.com; and F. Gebhart, “Travel Takes a Big Bite out of Corporate Expens- es,” Travel Market Report, May 30, 2013, downloaded June 9, 2013, from www .travelmarketreport.com.

the size of Your Meeting’s carbon Footprint an ethical Choice

Watch It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Teams (TWZ Role Play).

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 319

Creating Effective Teams Teams are often created deliberately but sometimes evolve organically. Take the rise of team “hives” over the past 5 years, for an organic example. Freelancing is typically the solo work of people who are highly specialized in their fields and can provide expertise to organizations on a short-term basis. The difficulty is for the freelancers to effectively market themselves to organizations, and for organizations to find freelancers who fit their needs. To bridge this gap, free- lancers form teams with other freelancers from complementary specialties to present a cohesive working unit—a hive—to clients. This team-based approach has proven very successful.19

Many people have tried to identify factors related to team effectiveness. To help, some studies have organized what was once a large list of characteristics into a relatively focused model.20 Exhibit 10-3 summarizes what we currently know about what makes teams effective. As you’ll see, it builds on many of the group concepts introduced in Chapter 9.

In considering the team effectiveness model, keep in mind two points. First, teams differ in form and structure. The model attempts to generalize across all varieties of teams but avoids rigidly applying its predictions to all teams.21 Use it as a guide. Second, the model assumes teamwork is preferable to individual work. Creating “effective” teams when individuals can do the job better is like perfectly solving the wrong problem. Third, let’s consider what team effectiveness means in this model. Typically, team effectiveness includes objective measures

10-4 Identify the characteris-tics of effective teams.

Team effectiveness modelExhibit 10-3

Team effectiveness

Process • Common purpose • Specific goals • Team efficacy • Team identity • Team cohesion • Mental models • Conflict levels • Social loafing

Composition • Abilities of members • Personality • Allocating roles • Diversity • Cultural differences • Size of teams • Member preferences

Context • Adequate resources • Leadership and structure • Climate of trust • Performance evaluation and reward systems

320 PART 3 The Group

of the team’s productivity, managers’ ratings of the team’s performance, and aggregate measures of member satisfaction.

We can organize the key components of effective teams into three general categories. First are the resources and other contextual influences that make teams effective. The second relates to the team’s composition. Finally, process vari- ables are events within the team that influence effectiveness. We will explore each of these components next.

Team Context: What Factors Determine Whether Teams are successful? The four contextual factors most significantly related to team performance are adequate resources, effective leadership, a climate of trust, and a performance evaluation and reward system that reflects team contributions.

adequate resources Teams are part of a larger organization system; every work team relies on resources outside the group to sustain it. A scarcity of resources directly reduces the ability of a team to perform its job effectively and achieve its goals. As one study concluded after looking at 13 factors related to group performance, “perhaps one of the most important characteristics of an effective work group is the support the group receives from the organization.”22 This support includes timely information, proper equipment, adequate staffing, encouragement, and administrative assistance.

leadership and structure Teams can’t function if they can’t agree on who is to do what and ensure all members share the workload. Agreeing on the specifics of work and how they fit together to integrate individual skills requires leader- ship and structure, either from management or from team members themselves. In self-managed teams, members absorb many of the duties typically assumed by managers. A manager’s job then becomes managing outside (rather than inside) the team.

As we mentioned before, leadership is especially important in multiteam systems. Here, leaders need to delegate responsibility to teams and play the role of facilitator, making sure the teams work together rather than against one another.23

Climate of Trust Trust is the foundation of leadership; it allows a team to accept and commit to the leader’s goals and decisions. Members of effective teams exhibit trust in their leaders.24 They also trust each other. Interpersonal trust among team members facilitates cooperation, reduces the need to monitor each other’s behavior, and bonds individuals through the belief that members won’t take advantage of them. Members are more likely to take risks and expose vul- nerabilities when they can trust others on their team. The overall level of trust in a team is important, but the way trust is dispersed among team members also matters. Trust levels that are asymmetric and imbalanced between team mem- bers can mitigate the performance advantages of a high overall level of trust—in such cases, coalitions form that often undermine the team as a whole.25

Trust is a perception that can be vulnerable to shifting conditions in a team environment. Also, trust is not unequivocally desirable. For instance, recent research in Singapore found that, in high-trust teams, individuals are less likely to claim and defend personal ownership of their ideas, but individuals who do still claim personal ownership are rated as lower contributors by team members.26 This “punishment” by the team may reflect resentments that create negative relationships, increased conflicts, and reduced performance.

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 321

Performance evaluation and reward system Individual performance evalua- tions and incentives may interfere with the development of high-performance teams. So, in addition to evaluating and rewarding employees for their indi- vidual contributions, management should utilize hybrid performance systems that incorporate an individual member component to recognize individu- al contributions and a group reward to recognize positive team outcomes.27 Group-based appraisals, profit-sharing, small-group incentives, and other system modifications can reinforce team effort and commitment.

Team Composition Maria Contreras-Sweet, head of the U.S. Small Business Administration, said, “When I’m building a team, I’m looking for people who are resourceful. I need people who are flexible, and I really need people who are discreet. . . . Discreet- ness also speaks to integrity.”28 These are good qualities, but not all that we should consider when staffing teams. The team composition category includes variables that relate to how teams should be staffed: the abilities and personali- ties of team members, allocation of roles, diversity, cultural differences, size of the team, and members’ preferences for teamwork. As you can expect, opinions vary widely about the type of members leaders want on their teams.

abilities of members It’s true we occasionally read about an athletic team of mediocre players who, because of excellent coaching, determination, and preci- sion teamwork, beat a far more talented group. But such cases make the news precisely because they are unusual. A team’s performance depends in part on the knowledge, skills, and abilities of individual members.29 Abilities set limits on what members can do and how effectively they will perform on a team.

Research reveals insights into team composition and performance. First,  when solving a complex problem such as reengineering an assembly line, high-ability teams—composed of mostly intelligent members—do bet- ter than lower-ability teams. High-ability teams are also more adaptable to changing situations; they can more effectively apply existing knowledge to new problems.

Members of a research team at the innovation lab of Swiss bank UBS are testing digital, virtual reality, and other new technologies to attract a young generation of investors and to help current clients visualize complex investment portfolios. Team members have the technical expertise and skills needed to function as a high-ability team. Source: Arnd Wiegmann/Reuters

322 PART 3 The Group

Finally, the ability of the team’s leader matters. Smart team leaders help less intelligent team members when they struggle with a task. A less intelligent leader can, conversely, neutralize the effect of a high-ability team.30

Personality of members We demonstrated in Chapter 5 that personality signifi- cantly influences individual behavior. Some dimensions identified in the Big Five personality model are particularly relevant to team effectiveness.31 Con- scientiousness is especially important to teams. Conscientious people are good at backing up other team members and sensing when their support is truly needed. Conscientious teams also have other advantages—one study found that behavioral tendencies such as organization, achievement orientation, and endurance were all related to higher levels of team performance.32

Team composition can be based on individual personalities to good effect. Suppose an organization needs to create 20 teams of 4 people each and has 40  highly conscientious people and 40 who score low on conscientiousness. Would the organization be better off (1) forming 10 teams of highly consci- entious people and 10 teams of members low on conscientiousness, or (2) “seeding” each team with 2 people who scored high and 2 who scored low on conscientiousness? Perhaps surprisingly, evidence suggests option 1 is the best choice; performance across the teams will be higher if the organization forms 10 highly conscientious teams and 10 teams low in conscientiousness. The rea- son is that a team with varying conscientiousness levels will not work to the peak performance of its highly conscientious members. Instead, a group normaliza- tion dynamic (or simple resentment) will complicate interactions and force the highly conscientious members to lower their expectations, thus reducing the group’s performance.33

What about the other traits? Teams with a high level of openness to expe- rience tend to perform better, and research indicates that constructive task conflict enhances the effect. Open team members communicate better with one

Before we tell you whether this statement is true or false, we need to take a step back and ask: “Can individuals go on ‘hot’ streaks?” In teams, and especially in sports, we often hear about play- ers who are on a streak and have the “hot hand.” Basketball player LeBron James scores five baskets in a row, golfer Rory McIlroy makes three bird- ies in a row for the European Ryder Cup team, and tennis player Serena Williams hits four aces in a row dur- ing a doubles match with her sister Venus. Most people (around 90 per- cent) believe LeBron, Rory, and Ser- ena score well because they are on

a hot streak, performing above their average.

Although people believe in the hot hand, the scores tell the story. About half the relevant studies have shown that the hot hand is possible, while the remaining half show it is not. But perception can influence reality, so perhaps the more important question is whether belief in the hot hand affects teams’ strategies. One study of volleyball players showed that coaches and players allocate more balls to players who are believed to have the hot hand. Is this a good strategy? If the hot player’s performance is actually lower than her teammates’, then giving her more balls to hit will hurt the team

because the better players aren’t getting enough chances to hit, while she gets more chances to perform.

Considering the research to date, then, the opening statement appears to be false.

Sources: M. Raab, B. Gula, and G. Gigeren- zer, “The Hot Hand Exists in Volleyball and Is Used for Allocation Decisions,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 18, no. 1 (2012): 81–94; T Gilovich, R. Vallone, and A. Tversky, “The Hot Hand in Basketball: On the Misperception of Random Sequences,” Cog- nitive Psychology 17 (1985): 295–314; and M. Bar-Eli, S. Avugos, and M. Raab, “Twenty Years of ‘Hot Hand’ Research: The Hot Hand Phenomenon: Review and Critique,” Psychol- ogy, Sport, and Exercise 7 (2006): 525–53.

team Members Who are “Hot” should Make the Play myth or science?

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 323

another and throw out more ideas, which makes teams composed of open peo- ple more creative and innovative.34 Task conflict also enhances performance for teams with high levels of emotional stability.35 It’s not so much that the conflict itself improves performance for these teams, but that teams characterized by openness and emotional stability are able to handle conflict and leverage it to improve performance. The minimum level of team member agreeableness matters, too: teams do worse when they have one or more highly disagreeable members, and a wide span in individual levels of agreeableness can lower pro- ductivity. Research is not clear on the outcomes of extraversion, but a recent study indicated that a high mean level of extraversion in a team can increase the level of helping behaviors, particularly in a climate of cooperation.36 Thus the personality traits of individuals are as important to teams as the overall personal- ity characteristics of the team.

allocation of roles Teams have different needs, and members should be se- lected to ensure all the various roles are filled. A study of 778 major league base- ball teams over a 21-year period highlights the importance of assigning roles appropriately.37 As you might expect, teams with more experienced and skilled members performed better. However, the experience and skill of those in core roles who handled more of the workflow of the team, and were central to all work processes (in this case, pitchers and catchers), were especially vital. In other words, put your most able, experienced, and conscientious workers in the most central roles in a team.

We can identify nine potential team roles (see Exhibit 10-4). Successful work teams have selected people to play all these roles based on their skills and pref- erences.38 (On many teams, individuals will play multiple roles.) To increase the

Key roles of TeamsExhibit 10-4

Team

Adviser

Creator

Promoter

Assessor

Organizer

Producer

Controller

Maintainer

Linker

Fights external battles

Ini tia

tes c

re at

ive id

ea s

Cham pion

s ide as

after they

’re in itiate

d

Offers insightful analysis of options

Provides

structure

Exa min

es de

tai ls

an d e

nfo rce

s ru les

Pr ov

id es

d ire

ct io

n an

d fo

llo w

-th ro

ug h

C oordinates and

integrates

Encourages the search

for more information

324 PART 3 The Group

likelihood team members will work well together, managers need to understand the individual strengths each person can bring to a team, select members with their strengths in mind, and allocate work assignments that fit with members’ preferred styles.

Diversity of members In Chapter 9, we discussed the effect of diversity on groups. How does team diversity affect team performance? The degree to which members of a work unit (group, team, or department) share a common demo- graphic attribute, such as age, sex, race, educational level, or length of service in the organization, is the subject of organizational demography. Organizational demography suggests that attributes such as age or the date of joining should help predict turnover. The logic goes like this: Turnover will be greater among those with dissimilar experiences because communication is more difficult and conflict is more likely. Increased conflict makes membership less attractive, so employees are more likely to quit. Similarly, the losers of a conflict are more apt to leave voluntarily or be forced out.39 The conclusion is that diversity negatively affects team performance.

Many of us hold the optimistic view that diversity should be a good thing— diverse teams should benefit from differing perspectives. Two meta-analytic reviews show, however, that demographic diversity is essentially unrelated to team performance, while a third review suggests that race and gender diversity are actually negatively related to team performance.40 Other research findings are mixed. One qualifier is that gender and ethnic diversity have more nega- tive effects in occupations dominated by white or male employees, but in more demographically balanced occupations, diversity is less of a problem. Diversity in function, education, and expertise are positively related to team performance, but these effects are small and depend on the situation.

Proper leadership can improve the performance of diverse teams.41 For example, one study of 68 teams in China found that teams diverse in knowl- edge, skills, and ways of approaching problems were more creative, but only when their leaders were transformational (see Chapter 12 for definition) and inspiring.42

Cultural Differences We have discussed research on team diversity regarding a number of differences. But what about cultural differences? Evidence indicates cultural diversity interferes with team processes, at least in the short term,43 but let’s dig a little deeper: what about differences in cultural status? Though it’s debatable, people with higher cultural status are usually in the majority or rul- ing race group of their nations. Researchers in the United Kingdom found that cultural status differences affected team performance, whereby individuals in teams with more high cultural-status members than low cultural-status members realized improved performance . . . for every member.44 This suggests not that diverse teams should be filled with individuals who have high cultural status in their countries, but that we should be aware of how people identify with their cultural status even in diverse group settings.

In general, cultural diversity seems to be an asset for tasks that call for a variety of viewpoints. But culturally heterogeneous teams have more difficulty learning to work with each other and solving problems. The good news is that these difficulties seem to dissipate with time.

size of Teams Most experts agree that keeping teams small is key to improving group effectiveness.45 Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos uses the “two-pizza” rule, say- ing, “If it takes more than two pizzas to feed the team, the team is too big.”46 Psychologist George Miller claimed “the magical number [is] seven, plus or

organizational demography The degree to which members of a work unit share a common demographic attribute, such as age, sex, race, educational level, or length of service in an organization, and the impact of this attribute on turnover.

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 325

minus two,” as the ideal team size.47 Author and Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard writes, “Bigger teams almost never correlate with a greater chance of success” because the potential connections between people grow exponentially as team size increases, complicating communications.48

Generally speaking, the most effective teams have five to nine members. Experts suggest using the smallest number of people who can do the task. Unfortunately, managers often err by making teams too large. It may require only four or five members to develop an array of views and skills, while coordi- nation problems can increase as team members are added. When teams have excess members, cohesiveness and mutual accountability decline, social loafing

Please don’t call me sexist; women are great colleagues and equally effective managers, but I’d rather have men on my team. It’s more relaxing for me, and for the other guys I think, because we naturally understand each other and can talk freely. The teams with all men that I’ve been in have all been very productive.

— Jorge Dear Jorge, With all the talk currently focused on gender diversity in organizations, your viewpoint is refreshingly honest. And your preferences are not uncommon. Researchers who studied 8 years of employee surveys from a large U.S. organization found that individuals were happier on teams mainly of their own gender, whereas those on diverse teams reported less happiness, trust, and cooperation. Researcher Sara Fisher Ellison noted, “People are more comfortable around other people who are like them.”

In some ways, the preference for our own gender in teams is an ugly truth. After all, if there hadn’t been gender diversity initiatives and protec- tions, a majority of professional posi- tions may still be closed to women in masculine cultures like Japan, Austria, and Venezuela (see Hofstede’s cultural values in Chapter 5). The value sys- tem in many countries has fortunately changed, with increased recognition

of team diversity’s potential for higher morale, trust, and satisfaction. Notice that these are values, as opposed to the reported reality from the paragraph above. Ellison concluded that there is a “mismatch between the kind of work- place people think they would like and the actual workplace that would make them happier.”

Don’t think this is your ticket to male-only teams, though. Happiness aside, this study found that diverse teams realized significantly greater rev- enues, productivity, and performance. Other research in Spain indicated that gender-diverse teams realize novel solutions and radical innovation at a greater rate. Still other research sug- gested that gender-diverse teams perform better than male-dominated ones in sales and profits. The contex- tual climate is key, though. One meta- analysis found that gender equality and collectivism were important conditions for task performance in diverse teams; a Danish study indicated that diverse top management teams realized higher financial performance only when the structure supported cross-functional team work; and a study in South Korea indicated that cooperative group norms can lower the negative effects of gen- der diversity.

What all this means for you is that, while you may naturally prefer to work with men, it’s not good for business.

You would be better off putting your efforts into creating an egalitarian atmosphere and choosing your team- mates based on what they can contrib- ute to your team.

Sources: C. Diaz-Garcia, A. Gonzalez-Moreno, and F. Jose Saez-Martinez, “Gender Diversity within R&D Teams: Its Impact on Radical- ness of Innovation,” Innovation-Management Policy & Practice 15, no. 2 (2013): 149–60; S. Hoogedoorn, H. Oosterbeek, and M. van Praag, “The Impact of Gender Diversity on the Performance of Business Teams: Evi- dence from a Field Experiment,” Manage- ment Science 59, no. 7 (2013): 1514–28; N. Opstrup and A. R. Villadsen, “The Right Mix? Gender Diversity in Top Management Teams and Financial Performance,” Public Administration Review, 2015, 291–301; M. Schneid, R. Isidor, C. Li, et al., “The Influ- ence of Cultural Context on the Relation- ship between Gender Diversity and Team Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 26, no. 6 (2015): 733–56; J. Y. Seong and D.-S. Hong, “Gender Diversity: How Can We Facili- tate Its Positive Effects on Teams?” Social Behavior and Personality 41, no. 3 (2013): 497–508; and R. E. Silverman, “Do Men and Women Like Working Together?” The Wall Street Journal, December 16, 2014, D2.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

is it wrong that i’d rather have guys on my team? Career oBjectives

326 PART 3 The Group

increases, and people communicate less. Members of large teams have trouble coordinating with one another, especially under time pressure. When a natural working unit is larger and you want a team effort, consider breaking the group into subteams.49

member Preferences Not every employee is a team player. Given the option, many employees will select themselves out of team participation. When people who prefer to work alone are required to team up, there is a direct threat to the team’s morale and to individual member satisfaction.50 This suggests that, when selecting team members, managers should consider individual preferenc- es along with abilities, personalities, and skills. High-performing teams are likely to be composed of people who prefer working as part of a group.

Team Processes The final category related to team effectiveness includes process variables such as member commitment to a common purpose, establishment of specific team goals, team efficacy, team identity, team cohesion, mental models, a managed level of conflict, and minimized social loafing. These will be especially impor- tant in larger teams and in teams that are highly interdependent.51

Why are processes important to team effectiveness? Teams should create outputs greater than the sum of their inputs. Exhibit 10-5 illustrates how group processes can have an impact on a group’s actual effectiveness.52 Teams are often used in research laboratories because they can draw on the diverse skills of various individuals to produce more meaningful research than researchers working independently—that is, they produce positive synergy, and their pro- cess gains exceed their process losses.

Common Plan and Purpose Effective teams begin by analyzing the team’s mission, developing goals to achieve that mission, and creating strategies for achieving the goals. Teams that consistently perform better have a clear sense of

A Japanese nurse (left) served on a seven-member medical team formed by the International Committee of the Red Cross and deployed to the Philippines after a typhoon hit Mindanoa Island. The small team of health care workers had the capacity to respond quickly and effectively in providing patients with emergency medical care. Source: Kyodo/AP Images

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 327

what needs to be done and how.53 This sounds obvious, but many teams ignore this fundamental process.

Members of successful teams put a tremendous amount of time and effort into discussing, shaping, and agreeing on a purpose that belongs to them col- lectively and individually. This common purpose, when accepted by the team, becomes what GPS is to a ship captain: It provides direction and guidance under any conditions. Like a ship following the wrong course, teams that don’t have good planning skills are doomed, executing the wrong plan.54 Teams should agree on whether their purpose is to learn about and master a task or simply to perform the task; evidence suggests that differing perspectives on learning versus performance lead to lower levels of team performance overall.55

Effective teams show reflexivity, meaning they reflect on and adjust their purpose when necessary. A team must have a good plan, but it needs to be will- ing and able to adapt when conditions call for it.56 Interestingly, some evidence suggests that teams high in reflexivity are better able to adapt to conflicting plans and goals among team members.57

specific goals Successful teams translate their common purpose into specific, measurable, and realistic performance goals. Specific goals facilitate clear com- munication. They help teams maintain their focus on getting results.

Consistent with the research on individual goals, team goals should be chal- lenging. Difficult but achievable goals raise team performance on those criteria for which they’re set. So, for instance, goals for quantity tend to increase quan- tity, goals for accuracy increase accuracy, and so on.58

Team efficacy Effective teams have confidence in themselves; they believe they can succeed. We call this team efficacy.59 Teams that have been successful raise their beliefs about future success, which, in turn, motivates them to work harder. In addition, teams that have a shared knowledge of individual capabilities can strengthen the link between team members’ self-efficacy and their individual creativity because members can more effectively solicit informed opinions from their teammates.60 What can management do to increase team efficacy? Two options are helping the team achieve small successes that build confidence, and providing training to improve members’ technical and interpersonal skills. The greater the abilities of team members, the more likely the team will develop confidence and the ability to deliver on that confidence.

Team Identity In Chapter 9, we discussed the important role of social identity in people’s lives. When people connect emotionally with the groups they’re in, they are more likely to invest in their relationship with those groups. It’s the same with teams. For example, research with soldiers in the Netherlands indicated that individuals who felt included and respected by team members became more willing to work hard for their teams, even though as soldiers they were already called upon to be dedicated to their units. Therefore, by recog- nizing individuals’ specific skills and abilities, as well as creating a climate of

reflexivity A team characteristic of reflecting on and adjusting the master plan when necessary.

team efficacy A team’s collective belief that they can succeed at their tasks.

effects of group ProcessesExhibit 10-5

Potential group effectiveness

+ =–Process gains

Process losses

Actual group effectiveness

328 PART 3 The Group

respect and inclusion, leaders and members can foster positive team identity and improved team outcomes.61

Organizational identity is important, too. Rarely do teams operate in a vacuum—more often teams interact with other teams, requiring interteam coordination. Individuals with a positive team identity but without a positive organizational identity can become fixed to their teams and unwilling to coordinate with other teams within the organization.62

Team Cohesion Have you ever been a member of a team that really “gelled,” one in which team members felt connected? The term team cohesion means members are emotionally attached to one another and motivated toward the team because of their attachment. Team cohesion is a useful tool to predict team outcomes. For example, a large study in China recently indicated that if team cohesion is high and tasks are complex, costly investments in promotions, rewards, training, and so forth yield greater profitable team creativity. Teams with low cohesion and simple tasks, on the other hand, are not likely to respond to incentives with greater creativity.63

Team cohesion is a strong predictor of team performance such that when cohesion is harmed, performance may be, too. Negative relationships are one driver of reduced cohesion. To mitigate this effect, teams can foster high levels of interdependence and high-quality interpersonal interactions.

mental models Effective teams share accurate mental models—organized men- tal representations of the key elements within a team’s environment that team members share.64 (If team mission and goals pertain to what a team needs to be effective, mental models pertain to how a team does its work.) If team members have the wrong mental models, which is particularly likely in teams under acute stress, their performance suffers.65 One review of 65 independent studies found that teams with shared mental models engaged in more frequent interactions with one another, were more motivated, had more positive attitudes toward their work, and had higher levels of objectively-rated performance.66 If team

team identity A team member’s affinity for and sense of belongingness to his or her team.

team cohesion A situation when team members are emotionally attached to one another and motivated toward the team because of their attachment.

mental models Team members’ knowledge and beliefs about how the work gets done by the team.

Product Hunt founder Ryan Hoover (on computer) and his entrepreneurial team are highly cohesive. The com- pany describes itself as a “tight-knit team” whose members share a love of new tech products, care about people, and are passionate about building communities that celebrate tech creations. Source: LiPo Ching/Bay Area News Group/TNS/Landov

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 329

members have different ideas about how to do things, however, the team will fight over methods rather than focus on what needs to be done.67

Individuals who normally function in action teams—teams with specialists engaged in intense, interdependent, and unpredictable tasks—are likely to share mental models. Even though they are often under acute stress, their per- formance levels can be high because the stress has been normalized through the expected context. These action teams have learned that the best way to share mental models is to voice them. An anesthetic team in a hospital is one example of an action team with shared mental models. For example, research in Switzerland found that anesthetic teams communicated two distinct types of messages while in an operation: vocally monitoring each others’ performance (not to criticize but to keep a vocal record of events), and “talking to the room” (announcements to everyone such as “Patient’s blood pressure is dropping”). The study found that high- and low-performing teams communicated in these ways equally often; what mattered to performance was the sequencing of the communication to maintain a shared mental model. High-performing teams followed up monitoring dialogue with assistance and instructions, and talking- to-the-room dialogue with further team dialogue.68 The message seems simple: to maintain shared mental models, share conversation about what is happening while the team is in operation!

Conflict levels Conflict has a complex relationship with team performance, and it’s not necessarily bad. Relationship conflicts—those based on interper- sonal incompatibility, tension, and animosity toward others—are almost always dysfunctional. However, when teams are performing nonroutine activities, disagreements about task content—called task conflicts—stimulate discussion, promote critical assessment of problems and options, and can lead to better team decisions. According to one study conducted in China, moderate levels of task conflict during the initial phases of team performance were positively related to team creativity, but both very low and very high levels of task conflict were negatively related to team performance.69 In other words, both too much and too little disagreement about how a team should initially perform a creative task can inhibit performance.

The way conflicts are resolved can make the difference between effective and ineffective teams. A study of ongoing comments made by 37 autonomous work groups showed that effective teams resolved conflicts by explicitly discussing the issues, whereas ineffective teams had unresolved conflicts that were focused more on personalities and the way things were said.70

Which teams are more likely to have conflicts than others? It’s not a simple answer. While we may presume that diversity increases conflicts, the answer is likely to be much more subtle than that. For example, recent research in Spain found that when individual team members varied greatly in their perceptions of organizational support, task conflict increased, communication decreased, and ultimately team performance suffered.71 If the researchers had instead com- pared only the average level of organizational support given to the team, rather than how members perceived the support, they would have missed the correct causal links. Thus we need to be careful not to overgeneralize.

social loafing As we noted earlier, individuals can engage in social loafing and coast on the group’s effort when their particular contributions (or lack thereof) can’t be identified. Effective teams undermine this tendency by mak- ing members individually and jointly accountable for the team’s purpose, goals, and approach.72 Therefore, members should be clear on what they are individu- ally and jointly responsible for on the team.

330 PART 3 The Group

Turning Individuals into Team Players We’ve made a case for the value and growing popularity of teams. But many people are not inherently team players, and many organizations have historically nurtured individual accomplishments. Teams often fit well in countries that score high on collectivism, but what if an organization wants to introduce teams into a work population of individuals born and raised in an individualistic society?

Here are options for managers trying to turn individuals into team players.

selecting: hiring Team Players Some people already possess the interpersonal skills to be effective team play- ers. When hiring team members, be sure candidates can fulfill their team roles as well as technical requirements.73

Creating teams often means resisting the urge to hire the best talent no matter what. For example, the New York Knicks professional basketball team pays Carmelo Anthony well because he scores a lot of points for his team; but statistics show he takes more shots than other highly paid players in the league, which means fewer shots for his teammates.74

As a final consideration, personal traits appear to make some people bet- ter candidates for working in diverse teams. Teams made of members who like to work through difficult mental puzzles also seem more effective and able to capitalize on the multiple points of view that arise from diversity in age and education.75

Training: Creating Team Players Training specialists conduct exercises that allow employees to experience the satisfaction teamwork can provide. Workshops help employees improve their problem-solving, communication, negotiation, conflict-management, and coaching skills. L’Oréal, for example, found that successful sales teams required much more than a staff of high-ability salespeople. “What we didn’t account for was that many members of our top team in sales had been promoted because they had excellent technical and executional skills,” said L’Oréal’s senior VP David Waldock. As a result of introducing purposeful team training, Waldock says, “We are no longer a team just on paper, working independently. We have a real group dynamic now, and it’s a good one.”76 An effective team doesn’t develop overnight—it takes time.

rewarding: Providing Incentives to Be a good Team Player A traditional organization’s reward system must be reworked to encourage coop- erative efforts rather than competitive ones.77 Hallmark Cards Inc. added to its basic individual-incentive system an annual bonus based on the achievement of team goals. Whole Foods directs most of its performance-based rewards toward team performance. As a result, teams select new members carefully so they will

10-5 Explain how organiza-tions can create team players.

PErsonAl InvEnTory AssEssmEnTs team Development Behaviors Take this assessment to learn more about behavior in teams.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 331

contribute to team effectiveness (and, thus, team bonuses).78 It is usually best to set a cooperative tone as soon as possible in the life of a team. As we already noted, teams that switch from competitive to cooperative do not immediately share information, and they still tend to make rushed, poor-quality decisions.79 Apparently, the low trust typical of the competitive group will not be readily replaced by high trust with a quick change in reward systems.

Promotions, pay raises, and other forms of recognition should be given to individuals who work effectively as team members by training new colleagues, sharing information, helping resolve team conflicts, and mastering needed new skills. This doesn’t mean individual contributions should be ignored; rather, they should be balanced with selfless contributions to the team.

Finally, don’t forget the intrinsic rewards, such as camaraderie, that employees can receive from teamwork. It’s exciting to be part of a successful team. The opportunity for personal development of self and teammates can be a very satisfying and rewarding experience.

New engineering employees of India’s Tata Consultancy Services work in teams to construct paper boats during a team-building exercise at the firm’s training center. Creating team players is essential to the success of TCS as employees must collaborate and work cohesively in providing IT consulting services and business solutions for global clients. Source: Namas Bhojani/Bloomberg via Getty Images

try It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: Teams.

Beware! Teams Aren’t Always the Answer Teamwork takes more time and often more resources than individual work. Teams have increased communication demands, conflicts to manage, and meet- ings to run. So, the benefits of using teams have to exceed the costs, and that’s not always possible.80

10-6 Decide when to use individuals instead of teams.

332 PART 3 The Group

How do you know whether the work of your group would be better done in teams? You can apply three tests.81 First, can the work be done better by more than one person? Good indicators are the complexity of the work and the need for different perspectives. Simple tasks that don’t require diverse input are probably better left to individuals. Second, does the work create a common pur- pose or set of goals for the people in the group that is more than the aggregate of individual goals? Many service departments of new-vehicle dealers have intro- duced teams that link customer-service people, mechanics, parts specialists, and sales representatives. Such teams can better manage collective responsibility for ensuring customer needs are properly met.

The final test is to determine whether the members of the group are inter- dependent. Using teams makes sense when there is interdependence among tasks—the success of the whole depends on the success of each one, and the success of each one depends on the success of the others. Soccer, for instance, is an obvious team sport. Success requires a great deal of coordination among interdependent players. Conversely, except possibly for relays, swim teams are not really teams. They’re groups of individuals performing individually, whose total performance is merely the aggregate summation of their individual per- formances.

Summary Few trends have influenced jobs as much as the massive movement of teams into the workplace. Working on teams requires employees to cooperate with others, share information, confront differences, and sublimate personal interests for the greater good of the team. Understanding the distinctions between problem- solving, self-managed, cross-functional, and virtual teams as well as multiteam systems helps determine the appropriate applications for team-based work. Concepts such as reflexivity, team efficacy, team identity, team cohesion, and mental models bring to light important issues relating to team context, compo- sition, and processes. For teams to function optimally, careful attention must be given to hiring, creating, and rewarding team players. Still, effective organiza- tions recognize that teams are not always the best method for getting the work done efficiently. Careful discernment and an understanding of organizational behavior are needed.

Implications for Managers ●● Effective teams have adequate resources, effective leadership, a climate of

trust, and a performance evaluation and reward system that reflects team contributions. These teams have individuals with technical expertise, and the right traits and skills.

●● Effective teams tend to be small. They have members who fill role demands and who prefer to be part of a group.

●● Effective teams have members who believe in the team’s capabilities, are committed to a common plan and purpose, and have an accurate shared mental model of what is to be accomplished.

●● Select individuals who have the interpersonal skills to be effective team players, provide training to develop teamwork skills, and reward individu- als for cooperative efforts.

●● Do not assume that teams are always needed. When tasks will not benefit from interdependency, individuals may be the better choice.

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 333

to get the Most Out of teams, empower them

If you want high-performing teams with members who like each other and their jobs, here’s a simple solution: remove the leash tied to them by management and let them make their own deci- sions. In other words, empower them. This trend started a long time ago, when organizations realized that creating layers of bureaucracy thwarts innovation, slows progress to a trickle, and merely provides hoops for people to jump through in order to get anything done.

you can empower teams in two ways. one way is structurally, by transferring decision making from managers to team members and giving teams the official power to develop their own strategies. The other way is psychologically, by enhancing team members’ beliefs that they have more authority, even though legitimate authority still rests with the organization’s leaders. structural empowerment leads to heightened feelings of psychological empowerment, giving teams (and organizations) the best of both worlds.

research suggests empowered teams benefit in a number of ways. members are more motivated. They exhibit higher levels of commit- ment to the team and the organization. And they perform much better. Empowerment sends a signal to the team that it is trusted and doesn’t have to be constantly micromanaged by upper leadership. And when teams get the freedom to make their own choices, they accept more responsibility for and take ownership of both the good and the bad.

Granted, that responsibility also means empowered teams must take the initiative to foster their ongoing learning and development, but teams entrusted with the authority to guide their own destiny do just that. so, do yourself (and your company) a favor and make sure that teams, rather than needless layers of middle managers, are the ones making the decisions that count.

PoInT

Empowerment can do some good in certain circumstances, but it’s certainly not a cure-all.yes, organizations have become flatter over the past several decades, paving the way for decision-making authority to seep into lower levels of the organization. But consider that many teams are “empowered” simply because the management ranks have been so thinned that there is no one left to make the key calls. Empowerment is then just an excuse to ask teams to take on more responsibility without an accompanying increase in tangible benefits like pay.

In addition, the organization’s leadership already has a good idea of what it would like its teams (and individual employees) to accom- plish. If managers leave teams to their own devices, how likely is it that those teams will always choose what the manager wanted? Even if the manager offers suggestions about how the team might proceed, empowered teams can easily ignore that advice. Instead, they need direction on what goals to pursue and how to pursue them. That’s what effective leadership is all about.

When decision-making authority is distributed among team mem- bers, each member’s role is less clear, and members lack a leader to whom they can go for advice. And finally, when teams are self-managed, they become like silos, disconnected from the rest of the organization and its mission. simply handing people authority is no guarantee they will use it effectively. so, leave the power to make decisions in the hands of those who were assigned leadership roles. After all, they got to be leaders for a reason, and they can best guide the team to stay fo- cused and perform at top levels to maximize organizational outcomes.

CoUnTErPoInT

Sources: s. I. Tannenbaum, J. mathieu, E. salas, and D. Cohen, “Teams Are Changing: Are research and Practice Evolving Fast Enough?” Industrial and Organizational Psychology 5 (2012): 2–24; and r. Ashkenas, “How to Empower your Team for non-negotiable results,” Forbes, April 24, 2013, downloaded June 10, 2013, from www.forbes.com.

334 PART 3 The Group

cHaPter revieW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QuestiOns FOr revieW

10-1 How do you explain the growing popularity of teams in organizations?

10-2 What is the difference between a group and a team?

10-3 What are the five types of team arrangements?

10-4 What conditions or context factors determine whether teams are effective?

10-5 How can organizations create team players? 10-6 When is work performed by individuals preferred over work performed by teams?

exPerientiaL exercise Composing the “Perfect” Team Break into teams of four to five. Assume you work for a company that redesigns existing products to improve them, from computer keyboards to bicycle helmets to toothbrushes. As a result, creativity is a key factor in whether your company succeeds in developing a product that is marketable.

You need to staff a new team of 5 individuals, and you have a pool of 20 to choose from. For each person, you have information about the following characteris- tics: intelligence, work experience, conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extraversion.

Answer the following questions as a team:

10-7. If you could form your perfect team for this con- text, what would it look like? In other words, what

characteristics would you choose for each of the five members—a lot of work experience or a little; high, moderate, or low conscientiousness; and so on? Why?

10-8. How, if at all, would your choices change if the task required teams to make quick decisions that were not necessarily the most creative? Why?

10-9. Each member of your group should describe his or her ideal team member—one hypothetical person you’d most like to work with in this con- text (use the same criteria as in question 10-7). As a group, compare your responses. Does every person’s ideal member share the same charac- teristics, or are there differences? If you could, would you compose a team entirely of your ideal individuals? Why or why not?

etHicaL DiLeMMa The Sum of the Team Is Less Than Its Members Of the billions of tons of carbon let loose into the world’s atmosphere each year, China is responsible for 21 per- cent, mostly due to its growth in manufacturing. And due to the billions of tons of wastewater and sewage released

into rivers and lakes by Chinese chemical firms every year, 300 million of its citizens do not have clean drinking water. Clearly, these ethical breaches represent the failure not of one individual but of scores of teams: to be exact, top man-

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 335

Sources: “Eight Cases That Mattered,” ChinaDialogue, https://www.chinadialogue.net/article/ show/single/en/4429-Eight-cases-that-mattered, accessed June 22, 2015; “Facts about Chromium,” Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/region7/pdf/national_beef_leathers- prime_tanning_chromiumVI_Fact_Sheet.pdf, accessed June 22, 2015; EJOLT Team at School of Geography and China Centre, University of Oxford, “Heavy Metal Pollution in Quijing, Yunnan, China,” Environmental Justice Atlas, February 25, 2015; S. Thau, R. Derfler-Rozin, M. Pitesa, M. S. Mitchell, and M. M. Pillutla, “Unethical for the Sake of the Group: Risk of Social Exclusion and Pro-Group Unethical Behavior,” Journal of Applied Psychology 100, no. 1 (2015): 98–113; J. Steinberg, “Hinckley: No Hollywood Ending for Erin Brockovich’s Tainted Town,” San Jose Mercury News, July 7, 2013, http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_23649050/hinkley-no-hollywood-ending-erin-brockovichs- tainted-town; and X. Wang and M. N. Young, “Does Collectivism Affect Environmental Ethics? A Multi-Level Study of Top Management Teams from Chemical Firms in China,” Journal of Business Ethics 122, no. 3 (2014): 387–94.

agement teams in organizations throughout the country. Does that mean the leaders of China’s companies are all unethical? Surely not.

To increase corporate social responsibility (CSR), we need to understand the team dynamics that lead to unethi- cal decision making. First, we examine the context. As a major emerging country, China witnessed unprecedented growth in industry that has brought opportunities for cor- porate profits, better salaries, and better access to services for its citizens. Millions have been able to pull themselves and their families out of poverty. Few would argue that providing jobs and services isn’t a highly ethical pursuit. However, top management teams now face pressure to sustain growth at any cost. The top management team of Rongping Chemical Company made the tragic decision to cut costs and increase profits by dumping untreated chlo- rine into rivers, raising the level of chromium-6—a taste- less, odorless compound that causes ulcers and cancers— to over 20 times national standards. Other organizations, like Luliang Chemical Company, have done the same, en- dangering the health of the same citizens it helps with jobs and opportunities.

Some observers have been shocked that top manage- ment teams in a country with collectivist values, which stress a group-oriented outlook, would make decisions that don’t consider everyone affected by them. One recent study indicated that the problem is competing ethical principles: duty to others v. duty to society. As management teams faced financial dissatisfaction about their firm’s performance, environmental ethics and CSR actions decreased, suggesting the teams were feeling pres- sure from their organization’s stakeholders and becom- ing less concerned about the environment. They may also have rationalized that providing jobs was for the greater societal good and believed that violating stakeholder expectations would cost them their own place on the

management team. However, the study found that on an individual level, when a person’s sense of collectivist values increased, environmental ethics also increased, suggesting that the top managers did favor CSR initiatives, but other concerns predominated in the team settings. We may con- clude that these teams are likely hindering the progress of environmental awareness. When teams feel pressured to meet certain (sometimes narrow) metrics, there may be more unethical team decisions than individual members would make on their own.

Questions 10-10. Do you think you could be convinced to let your

organization dump chemicals such as chromium-6 into the water supply? Why or why not?

10-11. Why might top management teams be more likely to make unethical decisions than their individual members would make?

10-12. The cases of Rongping and Luliang are far from isolated incidents. You may remember the case of Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E), which dumped chromium-6 into the water supply in Hinckley, Cali- fornia, as recounted in the movie Erin Brockovich. That case resulted in a $333 million award, the larg- est settlement ever in a direct-action lawsuit, to help the town’s 2,000 residents. In contrast, when 1,721 villagers brought suit against Rongping (more plaintiffs than ever in China, to date), the court ordered the company to pay only a total compensa- tion of $105,000 for damage to the land. And the Chinese environmental group Friends of Nature filed the country’s first-ever public-interest lawsuit, which shut down Rongping’s plant in a village, but did not offer monetary restitution for the villagers. How might these outcomes affect the ethical deci- sions of top management teams in the future?

336 PART 3 The Group

Sources: E. Bernstein, “Speaking Up Is Hard to Do: Researchers Explain Why,” The Wall Street Journal, February 7, 2012, D1; M. Kashtan, “Want Teamwork? Promote Free Speech,” The New York Times, April 13, 2014, 8; and H. Leroy et al., “Behavioral Integrity for Safety, Priority of Safety, Psychologi- cal Safety, and Patient Safety: A Team-Level Study,” Journal of Applied Psychology (November 2012): 1273–81.

case inciDent 2 Smart Teams and Dumb Teams In this chapter, we’ve identified how some of the characteristics we use to describe individuals also can describe teams. For example, individuals can be high in the trait of openness, as can a team. Along the same lines, have you noticed that some teams seem to be smart, while others seem, um, dumb? This characteristic has nothing to do with the average IQ of the team members but instead reflects the functionality of the whole team. Teams that are

synergistic excel in logical analysis, brainstorming, coor- dination, planning, and moral reasoning. And teams that are dumb? Think of long unproductive meetings, social loafing, and interpersonal conflicts.

You might be remembering a few teams you’ve wit- nessed that are in the dumb category, but we hope you can think of a few that excelled. Smart teams tend to be smart in everything—for any task, they will find a

case inciDent 1 Tongue-Tied in Teams Thirty-one-year-old Robert Murphy has the best inten- tions to participate in team meetings, but when it’s “game time,” he chokes. An online marketing representative, Robert cannot be criticized for lack of preparation. After being invited to a business meeting with six of his cowork- ers and his supervisor, Robert began doing his research on the meeting’s subject matter. He compiled notes and arranged them neatly. As soon as the meeting began, however, “I just sat there like a lump, fixated on the fact that I was quiet.” The entire meeting passed without Robert contributing a word.

Robert is certainly not the first person to fail to speak up during meetings, and he won’t be the last. While some silent employees may not have any new ideas to contribute, the highly intelligent also freeze. One study found that if we believe our peers are smarter, we experience anxiety that temporarily blocks our ability to think effectively. In other words, worrying about what the group thinks of you makes you dumber. The study also found the effect was worse for women, perhaps because they can be more socially attuned to what others may think.

In other cases, failing to speak up may be attributed to personality. While the extraverted tend to be asser- tive and assured in group settings, the more introverted prefer to collect their thoughts before speaking—if they

speak at all. But again, even those who are extraverted can remain quiet, especially when they feel they cannot contribute.

You may be wondering whether it is important for everyone to speak up. Collaboration (the word comes from “laboring together” in Latin) is at the heart of organizational transformation, so yes, the more participa- tion, the more likely the collaboration will result in higher trust, increased productivity, and enhanced creativity. Furthermore, collaboration works best when individuals know their ideas are taken seriously.

The message from research is clear: give free speech a try!

Questions 10-13. Recall a time when you failed to speak up during

a group meeting. What were the reasons for your silence? Are they similar to or different from the reasons discussed here?

10-14. Can you think of strategies that can help the tongue-tied?

10-15. Imagine you are leading a team meeting and you notice that a couple of team members are not contributing. What specific steps might you take to try to increase their contributions?

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 337

Source: E. E. F. Bradford, I. Jentzsch, and J.-C. Gomez, “From Self to Cognition: Theory of Mind Mechanisms and Their Relation to Executive Functioning,” Cognition 138 (2015): 21–34; B. Maciejovsky, M. Sutter, D. V. Budescu, et al., “Teams Make You Smarter: How Exposure to Teams Improves Individual Decisions in Probability and Reasoning Tasks,” Management Science 59, no. 6 (2013): 1255–70; and A. Woolley, T. W. Malone, and C. Chabris, “Why Some Teams Are Smarter Than Others,” The New York Times, January 18, 2015, 5.

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

10-19. Regarding Case Incident 1, do you think it’s necessary for everyone to speak up in a team? Why or why not? 10-20. In reference to Case Incident 2, do you think you can read emotions from people’s eyes enough to react well

to them in teams? Why or why not? There are Reading the Mind from the Eyes tests online if you want to test your skill.

10-21. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

workable solution. But what makes them smart? Re- searchers in an MIT study grouped 697 subjects into teams of 2–5 members to solve tasks, looking for the characteristics of smart teams (they weren’t all smart). The findings were:

1. Smart teams did not allow individual members to dominate. Instead, there were more equal contribu- tions from members than in other teams.

2. Smart teams had more members who were able to read minds. Just kidding. But the members were able to read complicated emotions by looking into the eyes of others. There is a test for this ability called Reading the Mind in the Eyes.

3. Smart teams had more women. It’s not that smart teams had more gender equality; these teams simply had more women. This result might be partly due to the fact that more women scored higher in the Read- ing the Mind in the Eyes test.

The researchers recently replicated the study using 68 teams and again found that some teams were smarter than others. This study added a new angle to the research: How would teams working in person differ from teams working online? Surprisingly, there was little difference: All smart teams had more equal member communication (and plenty of it) and were good at emotion reading. When the online collaborators could not see each other, they prac- ticed Theory of Mind, remembering and reacting to the emotional cues they were able to detect through any mode

of communication. Theory of Mind is related to emotional intelligence (EI), which we discussed in Chapter 4.

When we have the opportunity to hand-pick team members, we can look for those who listen as much as they speak, express empathy, and remember what others tell them about themselves. For teams to which we are as- signed, we can seek these attributes in others and help guide the team toward its best self. As for IQ? Here’s the good news: Recent research indicates that our member- ship in a team actually makes us smarter decision-makers as individuals!

Questions 10-16. From your experiences in teams, do you agree with

the researchers’ findings on the characteristics of smart teams? Why or why not?

10-17. On the highly functioning teams in which you’ve been a member, what other characteristics might have contributed to success?

10-18. The authors who suggested that membership in a team makes us smarter found that teams were more rational and quicker at finding solutions to difficult probability problems and reasoning tasks than were individuals. However, after participation in the study, team members were much better at decision making on their own, even up to 5 weeks later. Do you think this spillover effect would hap- pen equally for people in smart teams and dumb teams? Why or why not?

338 PART 3 The Group

enDnOtes 1R. Karlgaard, “Think (Really!) Small,” Forbes, April 13, 2015, 32. 2J. C. Gorman, “Team Coordination and Dynamics: Two Central Issues,” Current Direc- tions in Psychological Science 23, no. 5 (2014): 355–60. 3Ibid. 4J. Mathieu, M. T. Maynard, T. Rapp, and L. Gilson, “Team Effectiveness 1997–2007: A Review of Recent Advancements and a Glimpse into the Future,” Journal of Manage- ment 34, no. 3 (2008): 410–76. 5See, for example, A. Erez, J. A. LePine, and H. Elms, “Effects of Rotated Leadership and Peer Evaluation on the Functioning and Effectiveness of Self-Managed Teams: A Quasi- experiment,” Personnel Psychology (Winter 2002): 929–48. 6G. L. Stewart, S. H. Courtright, and M. R. Barrick, “Peer-Based Control in Self- Managing Teams: Linking Rational and Normative Influence with Individual and Group Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 97, no. 2 (2012): 435–47. 7C. W. Langfred, “The Downside of Self- Management: A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Conflict on Trust, Autonomy, and Task Interdependence in Self-Managing Teams,” Academy of Management Journal 50, no. 4 (2007): 885–900. 8B. H. Bradley, B. E. Postlethwaite, A. C. Klotz, M. R. Hamdani, and K. G. Brown, “Reaping the Benefits of Task Conflict in Teams: The Critical Role of Team Psychological Safety Climate,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, no. 1 (2012): 151–58. 9J. Devaro, “The Effects of Self-Managed and Closely Managed Teams on Labor Productivity and Product Quality: An Empirical Analysis of a Cross-Section of Establishments,” Industrial Relations 47, no. 4 (2008): 659–98. 10A. Shah, “Starbucks Strives for Instant Grati- fication with Via Launch,” PRWeek (December 2009): 15. 11F. Aime, S. Humphrey, D. S. DeRue, and J. B. Paul, “The Riddle of Heterarchy: Power Transitions in Cross-Functional Teams,” Acad- emy of Management Journal 57, no. 2 (2014): 327–52. 12B. Freyer and T. A. Stewart, “Cisco Sees the Future,” Harvard Business Review (November 2008): 73–79. 13See, for example, L. L. Martins, L. L. Gilson, and M. T. Maynard, “Virtual Teams: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here?” Journal of Management (November 2004):

805–35; and B. Leonard, “Managing Virtual Teams,” HRMagazine, June 2011, 39–42. 14J. E. Hoch and S. W. J. Kozlowski, “Leading Virtual Teams: Hierarchical Leadership, Struc- tural Supports, and Shared Team Leadership,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 3 (2014): 390–403. 15A. Malhotra, A. Majchrzak, and B. Rosen, “Leading Virtual Teams,” Academy of Manage- ment Perspectives (February 2007): 60–70; and J. M. Wilson, S. S. Straus, and B. McEvily, “All in Due Time: The Development of Trust in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Teams,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 19 (2006): 16–33. 16P. Balkundi and D. A. Harrison, “Ties, Lead- ers, and Time in Teams: Strong Inference about Network Structure’s Effects on Team Viability and Performance,” Academy of Man- agement Journal 49, no. 1 (2006): 49–68; G. Chen, B. L. Kirkman, R. Kanfer, D. Allen, and B. Rosen, “A Multilevel Study of Leadership, Empowerment, and Performance in Teams,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 2 (2007): 331–46; L. A. DeChurch and M. A. Marks, “Leadership in Multiteam Systems,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 2 (2006): 311–29; A. Srivastava, K. M. Bartol, and E. A. Locke, “Em- powering Leadership in Management Teams: Effects on Knowledge Sharing, Efficacy, and Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 6 (2006): 1239–51; and J. E. Mathieu, K. K. Gilson, and T. M. Ruddy, “Empower- ment and Team Effectiveness: An Empirical Test of an Integrated Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 1 (2006): 97–108. 17R. B. Davison, J. R. Hollenbeck, C. M. Barnes, D. J. Sleesman, and D. R. Ilgen, “Coordinated Action in Multiteam Systems,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 4 (2012): 808–24. 18M. M. Luciano, J. E. Mathieu, and T. M. Ruddy, “Leading Multiple Teams: Average and Relative External Leadership Influences on Team Empowerment and Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 2 (2014): 322–31. 19R. Greenwald, “Freelancing Alone—But Together,” The Wall Street Journal, February 3, 2014, R5. 20V. Gonzalez-Roma and A. Hernandez, “Climate Uniformity: Its Influence on Team Communication Quality, Task Conflict, and Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy 99, no. 6 (2014): 1042–58; C. F. Peralta, P. N. Lopes, L. L. Gilson, P. R. Lourenco,

and L. Pais, “Innovation Processes and Team Effectiveness: The Role of Goal Clarity and Commitment, and Team Affective Tone,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 88, no. 1 (2015): 80–107; L. Thomp- son, Making the Team (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2000), 18–33; and J. R. Hack- man, Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performance (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2002). 21See G. L. Stewart and M. R. Barrick, “Team Structure and Performance: Assessing the Mediating Role of Intrateam Process and the Moderating Role of Task Type,” Academy of Management Journal (April 2000): 135–48. 22Hyatt and Ruddy, “An Examination of the Relationship between Work Group Character- istics and Performance,” 577. 23P. Balkundi and D. A. Harrison, “Ties, Leaders, and Time in Teams: Strong Infer- ence about Network Structure’s Effects on Team Viability and Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 1 (2006): 49–68; G. Chen, B. L. Kirkman, R. Kanfer, D. Allen, and B. Rosen, “A Multilevel Study of Leader- ship, Empowerment, and Performance in Teams,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 2 (2007): 331–46; L. A. DeChurch and M. A. Marks, “Leadership in Multiteam Systems,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 2 (2006): 311–29; A. Srivastava, K. M. Bartol, and E. A. Locke, “Empowering Leadership in Manage- ment Teams: Effects on Knowledge Sharing, Efficacy, and Performance,” Academy of Man- agement Journal 49, no. 6 (2006): 1239–51; and J. E. Mathieu, K. K. Gilson, and T. M. Ruddy, “Empowerment and Team Effectiveness: An Empirical Test of an Integrated Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 1 (2006): 97–108. 24K. T. Dirks, “Trust in Leadership and Team Performance: Evidence from NCAA Basket- ball,” Journal of Applied Psychology (December 2000): 1004–12; M. Williams, “In Whom We Trust: Group Membership as an Affective Context for Trust Development,” Academy of Management Review (July 2001): 377–96; and J. Schaubroeck, S. S. K. Lam, and A. C. Peng, “Cognition-Based and Affect-Based Trust as Mediators of Leader Behavior Influences on Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy, Online First Publication (February 7, 2011), doi: 10.1037/a0022625. 25B. A. De Jong and K. T. Dirks, “Beyond Shared Perceptions of Trust and Monitoring in Teams: Implications of Asymmetry and

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 339

Dissensus,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 2 (2012): 391–406. 26G. Brown, C. Crossley, and S. L. Robinson, “Psychological Ownership, Territorial Behav- ior, and Being Perceived as a Team Contribu- tor: The Critical Role of Trust in the Work Environment,” Personnel Psychology 67 (2014): 463–85. 27See F. Aime, C. J. Meyer, and S. E. Humphrey, “Legitimacy of Team Rewards: Analyzing Legitimacy as a Condition for the Effectiveness of Team Incentive Designs,” Journal of Business Research 63, no. 1 (2010): 60–66; and P. A. Bamberger and R. Levi, “Team-Based Reward Allocation Structures and the Helping Behaviors of Outcome- Interdependent Team Members,” Journal of Managerial Psychology 24, no. 4 (2009): 300–27; and M. J. Pearsall, M. S. Christian, and A. P. J. Ellis, “Motivating Interdependent Teams: Individual Rewards, Shared Rewards, or Something in Between?” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 1 (2010): 183–91. 28A. Bryant, “Taking Your Skills with You,” The New York Times, May 31, 2015, 2. 29R. R. Hirschfeld, M. H. Jordan, H. S. Feild, W. F. Giles, and A. A. Armenakis, “Becoming Team Players: Team Members’ Mastery of Teamwork Knowledge as a Predictor of Team Task Proficiency and Observed Teamwork Effectiveness,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 2 (2006): 467–74; and K. R. Randall, C. J. Resick, and L. A. DeChurch, “Building Team Adaptive Capacity: The Roles of Sense- giving and Team Composition,” Journal of Applied Psychology 96, no. 3 (2011): 525–40. 30H. Moon, J. R. Hollenbeck, and S. E. Hum- phrey, “Asymmetric Adaptability: Dynamic Team Structures as One-Way Streets,” Acad- emy of Management Journal 47, no. 5 (October 2004): 681–95; A. P. J. Ellis, J. R. Hollenbeck, and D. R. Ilgen, “Team Learning: Collectively Connecting the Dots,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 5 (October 2003): 821–35; C. L. Jackson and J. A. LePine, “Peer Re- sponses to a Team’s Weakest Link: A Test and Extension of LePine and Van Dyne’s Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 3 (June 2003): 459–75; and J. A. LePine, “Team Adaptation and Postchange Performance: Effects of Team Composition in Terms of Members’ Cognitive Ability and Personality,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 1 (Febru- ary 2003): 27–39. 31C. C. Cogliser, W. L. Gardner, M. B. Gavin, and J. C. Broberg, “Big Five Personality Fac- tors and Leader Emergence in Virtual Teams: Relationships with Team Trustworthiness,

Member Performance Contributions, and Team Performance,” Group & Organization Management 37, no. 6 (2012): 752–84; and “Deep-Level Composition Variables as Predic- tors of Team Performance: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 3 (2007): 595–615. 32T. A. O’Neill and N. J. Allen, “Personality and the Prediction of Team Performance,” European Journal of Personality 25, no. 1 (2011): 31–42. 33S. E. Humphrey, J. R. Hollenbeck, C. J. Meyer, and D. R. Ilgen, “Personality Configu- rations in Self-Managed Teams: A Natural Experiment on the Effects of Maximizing and Minimizing Variance in Traits,” Journal of Ap- plied Psychology 41, no. 7 (2011): 1701–32. 34Ellis, Hollenbeck, and Ilgen, “Team Learn- ing”; C. O. L. H. Porter, J. R. Hollenbeck, and D. R. Ilgen, “Backing Up Behaviors in Teams: The Role of Personality and Legiti- macy of Need,” Journal of Applied Psychology 88, no. 3 (June 2003): 391–403; and J. A. Colquitt, J. R. Hollenbeck, and D. R. Ilgen, “Computer-Assisted Communication and Team Decision-Making Performance: The Moderating Effect of Openness to Experi- ence,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no. 2 (April 2002): 402–10. 35B. H. Bradley, B. E. Postlewaite, and K. G. Brown, “Ready to Rumble: How Team Person- ality Composition and Task Conflict Interact to Improve Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 98, no. 2 (2013): 385–92. 36E. Gonzalez-Mule, D. S. DeGeest, B. W. McCormick, J. Y. Seong, and K. G. Brown, “Can We Get Some Cooperation around Here? The Mediating Role of Group Norms on the Relationship between Team Personality and Individual Helping Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 5 (2014): 988–99. 37S. E. Humphrey, F. P. Morgeson, and M. J. Mannor, “Developing a Theory of the Strate- gic Core of Teams: A Role Composition Model of Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 1 (2009): 48–61. 38C. Margerison and D. McCann, Team Man- agement: Practical New Approaches (London: Mercury Books, 2000). 39A. Joshi, “The Influence of Organizational Demography on the External Networking Behavior of Teams,” Academy of Management Review (July 2006): 583–95. 40A. Joshi and H. Roh, “The Role of Context in Work Team Diversity Research: A Meta-An- alytic Review,” Academy of Management Journal 52, no. 3 (2009): 599–627; S. K. Horwitz and I. B. Horwitz, “The Effects of Team Diversity

on Team Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review of Team Demography,” Journal of Management 33, no. 6 (2007): 987–1015; and S. T. Bell, A. J. Villado, M. A. Lukasik, L. Belau, and A. L. Briggs, “Getting Specific about Demographic Diversity Variable and Team Performance Relationships: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Management 37, no. 3 (2011): 709–43. 41S. J. Shin and J. Zhou, “When Is Educational Specialization Heterogeneity Related to Cre- ativity in Research and Development Teams? Transformational Leadership as a Moderator,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 6 (2007): 1709–21; and K. J. Klein, A. P. Knight, J. C. Ziegert, B. C. Lim, and J. L. Saltz, “When Team Members’ Values Differ: The Moderat- ing Role of Team Leadership,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 114, no. 1 (2011): 25–36. 42S. J. Shin, T. Kim, J. Lee, and L. Bian, “Cog- nitive Team Diversity and Individual Team Member Creativity: A Cross-Level Interac- tion,” Academy of Management Journal 55, no. 1 (2012): 197–212. 43S. Mohammed and L. C. Angell, “Surface- and Deep-Level Diversity in Workgroups: Examining the Moderating Effects of Team Orientation and Team Process on Relation- ship Conflict,” Journal of Organizational Behav- ior (December 2004): 1015–39. 44Y. F. Guillaume, D. van Knippenberg, and F. C. Brodebeck, “Nothing Succeeds Like Moderation: A Social Self-Regulation Perspec- tive on Cultural Dissimilarity and Perfor- mance,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 5 (2014): 1284–308. 45D. Coutu, “Why Teams Don’t Work” Harvard Business Review (May 2009): 99–105. The evi- dence in this section is described in Thomp- son, Making the Team, pp. 65–67. See also L. A. Curral, R. H. Forrester, and J. F. Dawson, “It’s What You Do and the Way That You Do It: Team Task, Team Size, and Innovation- Related Group Processes,” European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology 10, no. 2 (June 2001): 187–204; R. C. Liden, S. J. Wayne, and R. A. Jaworski, “Social Loafing: A Field Investigation,” Journal of Management 30, no. 2 (2004): 285–304. 46R. Karlgaard, “Think (Really!) Small.” 47Ibid. 48Ibid. 49“Is Your Team Too Big? Too Small? What’s the Right Number? Knowledge@Wharton, June 14, 2006, 1–5; see also A. M. Carton and J. N. Cummings, “A Theory of Subgroups in Work Teams,” Academy of Management Review 37, no. 3 (2012): 441–70.

340 PART 3 The Group

50Hyatt and Ruddy, “An Examination of the Relationship between Work Group Characteristics and Performance”; J. D. Shaw, M. K. Duffy, and E. M. Stark, “Interdepen- dence and Preference for Group Work: Main and Congruence Effects on the Satisfaction and Performance of Group Members,” Journal of Management 26, no. 2 (2000): 259–79; and S. A. Kiffin-Peterson and J. L. Cordery, “Trust, Individualism, and Job Characteristics of Employee Preference for Teamwork,” Interna- tional Journal of Human Resource Management (February 2003): 93–116. 51J. A. LePine, R. F. Piccolo, C. L. Jackson, J. E. Mathieu, and J. R. Saul, “A Meta-Analysis of Teamwork Processes: Tests of a Multidimen- sional Model and Relationships with Team Effectiveness Criteria,” Personnel Psychology 61 (2008): 273–307. 52J. F. Dovidio, “Bridging Intragroup Processes and Intergroup Relations: Needing the Twain to Meet,” British Journal of Social Psychology 52, no. 1 (2013): 1–24; and J. Zhou, J. Dovidio, and E. Wang, “How Affectively-Based and Cognitively-Based Attitudes Drive Intergroup Behaviours: The Moderating Role of Affective- Cognitive Consistency,” Plos One 8, no. 11 (2013): article e82150. 53J. A. LePine, R. F. Piccolo, C. L. Jackson, J. E. Mathieu, and J. R. Saul, “A Meta-Analysis of Teamwork Processes: Tests of a Multidimen- sional Model and Relationships with Team Effectiveness Criteria”; and J. E. Mathieu and T. L. Rapp, “Laying the Foundation for Successful Team Performance Trajectories: The Roles of Team Charters and Performance Strategies,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 1 (2009): 90–103. 54J. E. Mathieu and W. Schulze, “The Influ- ence of Team Knowledge and Formal Plans on Episodic Team Process–Performance Relation- ships,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 3 (2006): 605–19. 55A. N. Pieterse, D. van Knippenberg, and W. P. van Ginkel, “Diversity in Goal Orientation, Team Reflexivity, and Team Performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 114, no. 2 (2011): 153–64.

56A. Gurtner, F. Tschan, N. K. Semmer, and C. Nagele, “Getting Groups to Develop Good Strategies: Effects of Reflexivity Interventions on Team Process, Team Performance, and Shared Mental Models,” Organizational Behav- ior and Human Decision Processes 102 (2007): 127–42; M. C. Schippers, D. N. Den Hartog, and P. L. Koopman, “Reflexivity in Teams: A Measure and Correlates,” Applied Psychol- ogy: An International Review 56, no. 2 (2007): 189–211; and C. S. Burke, K. C. Stagl, E. Salas, L. Pierce, and D. Kendall, “Understanding Team Adaptation: A Conceptual Analysis and Model,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 6 (2006): 1189–207. 57A. N. Pieterse, D. van Knippenberg, and W. P. van Ginkel, “Diversity in Goal Orienta- tion, Team Reflexivity, and Team Perfor- mance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 114, no. 2 (2011): 153–64. 58See R. P. DeShon, S. W. J. Kozlowski, A. M. Schmidt, K. R. Milner, and D. Wiechmann, “A Multiple-Goal, Multilevel Model of Feedback Effects on the Regulation of Individual and Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychol- ogy (December 2004): 1035–56. 59K. Tasa, S. Taggar, and G. H. Seijts, “The Development of Collective Efficacy in Teams: A Multilevel and Longitudinal Per- spective,” Journal of Applied Psychology 92, no. 1 (2007): 17–27; D. I. Jung and J. J. Sosik, “Group Potency and Collective Efficacy: Examining Their Predictive Validity, Level of Analysis, and Effects of Performance Feedback on Future Group Performance,” Group & Organization Management (Septem- ber 2003): 366–91; and R. R. Hirschfeld and J. B. Bernerth, “Mental Efficacy and Physical Efficacy at the Team Level: Inputs and Outcomes among Newly Formed Action Teams,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 6 (2008): 1429–37. 60A. W. Richter, G. Hirst, D. van Knippen- berg, and M. Baer, “Creative Self-Efficacy and Individual Creativity in Team Contexts: Cross- Level Interactions with Team Informational Resources,” Journal of Applied Psychology 97, no. 6 (2012): 1282–90.

61N. Ellemers, E. Sleebos, D. Stam, and D. de Gilder, “Feeling Included and Valued: How Perceived Respect Affects Positive Team Iden- tity and Willingness to Invest in the Team,” British Journal of Management 24 (2013): 21–37. 62T. A. De Vries, F. Walter, G. S. Van Der Vegt, and P. J. M. D. Essens, “Antecedents of Individuals’ Interteam Coordination: Broad Functional Experiences as a Mixed Bless- ing,” Academy of Management Journal 57, no. 5 (2014): 1334–59. 63S. Chang, L. Jia, R. Takeuchi, and Y. Cai, “Do High-Commitment Work Systems Affect Cre- ativity? A Multilevel Combinational Approach to Employee Creativity,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 4 (2014): 665–80. 64S. Mohammed, L. Ferzandi, and K. Hamilton, “Metaphor No More: A 15-Year Review of the Team Mental Model Construct,” Journal of Man- agement 36, no. 4 (2010): 876–910. 65A. P. J. Ellis, “System Breakdown: The Role of Mental Models and Transactive Memory on the Relationships between Acute Stress and Team Performance,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 3 (2006): 576–89. 66L. A. DeChurch and J. R. Mesmer-Magnus, “The Cognitive Underpinnings of Effective Teamwork: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 1 (2010): 32–53. 67S. W. J. Kozlowski and D. R. Ilgen, “Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest (December 2006): 77–124; and B. D. Edwards, E. A. Day, W. Arthur Jr., and S. T. Bell, “Relationships among Team Ability Composition, Team Mental Models, and Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 3 (2006): 727–36. 68M. Kolbe, G. Grote, M. J. Waller, J. Wacker, B. Grande, and D. R. Spahn, “Monitoring and Talking to the Room: Autochthonous Coordination Patterns in Team Interaction and Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 6 (2014): 1254–67. 69J. Farh, C. Lee, and C. I. C. Farh, “Task Con- flict and Team Creativity: A Question of How Much and When,” Journal of Applied Psychology 95, no. 6 (2010): 1173–80.

Understanding Work Teams CHAPTER 10 341

70K. J. Behfar, R. S. Peterson, E. A. Mannix, and W. M. K. Trochim, “The Critical Role of Conflict Resolution in Teams: A Close Look at the Links between Conflict Type, Conflict Management Strategies, and Team Out- comes,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 1 (2008): 170–88. 71V. Gonzalez-Roma and A. Hernandez, “Cli- mate Uniformity: Its Influence on Team Com- munication Quality, Task Conflict, and Team Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 6 (2014): 1042–58. 72K. H. Price, D. A. Harrison, and J. H. Gavin, “Withholding Inputs in Team Contexts: Mem- ber Composition, Interaction Processes, Evalu- ation Structure, and Social Loafing,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, no. 6 (2006): 1375–84. 73G. Hertel, U. Konradt, and K. Voss, “Com- petencies for Virtual Teamwork: Development and Validation of a Web-Based Selection Tool

for Members of Distributed Teams,” European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 15, no. 4 (2006): 477–504. 74T. V. Riper, “The NBA’s Most Overpaid Play- ers,” Forbes, April 5, 2013, http://www.forbes .com/sites/tomvanriper/2013/04/05/the- nbas-most-overpaid-players/. 75E. Kearney, D. Gebert, and S. C. Voelpel, “When and How Diversity Benefits Teams: The Importance of Team Members’ Need for Cognition,” Academy of Management Journal 52, no. 3 (2009): 581–98. 76H. M. Guttman, “The New High-Perfor- mance Player,” The Hollywood Reporter, October 27, 2008, www.hollywoodreporter.com. 77C.-H. Chuang, S. Chen, and C.-W. Chuang, “Human Resource Management Practices and Organizational Social Capital: The Role of In- dustrial Characteristics,” Journal of Business Re- search (May 2013): 678–87; and L. Prusak and

D. Cohen, “How to Invest in Social Capital,” Harvard Business Review (June 2001): 86–93. 78T. Erickson and L. Gratton, “What It Means to Work Here,” BusinessWeek, January 10, 2008, www.businessweek.com. 79M. D. Johnson, J. R. Hollenbeck, S. E. Humphrey, D. R. Ilgen, D. Jundt, and C. J. Meyer, “Cutthroat Cooperation: Asymmetri- cal Adaptation to Changes in Team Reward Structures,” Academy of Management Journal 49, no. 1 (2006): 103–19. 80C. E. Naquin and R. O. Tynan, “The Team Halo Effect: Why Teams Are Not Blamed for Their Failures,” Journal of Applied Psychology (April 2003): 332–40. 81E. R. Crawford and J. A. Lepine, “A Config- ural Theory of Team Processes: Accounting for the Structure of Taskwork and Teamwork,” Academy of Management Review (January 2013): 32–48.

S ou

rc e:

J on

at ha

n Al

co rn

/B lo

om be

rg /G

et ty

Im ag

es

Communication11

342

Communication CHAPTER 11 343

Curious CommuniCation

He’s the producer of the hit TV show Empire and some of the hallmark mov-ies of our time: A Beautiful Mind, Apollo 13, Frost/Nixon, and Splash. He is co-founder of Imagine Entertainment, an innovative, successful

organization that has generated over $13.5 billion in revenues

worldwide. With an Academy Award and three decades of in-

dustry accomplishments, what more does Brian Grazer need to

know? Plenty, he claims. On a web page called grazeriscurious

.com and in a book titled The Curious Mind: The Secret to a Big-

ger Life, 63-year-old Grazer (pictured here) gives credit for his

success to his “curiosity conversations”—deliberate conversa-

tions with anyone who has something to share. “For 35 years, I’ve been tracking down people about whom

I was curious and asking if I could sit down with them for an

hour,” Grazer explained recently. “I’ve had as few as a dozen

‘curiosity conversations’ in a year, but sometimes I’ve done

them as often as once a week. I was so serious about the

curiosity conversations that I often spent a year or more trying

to get together with particular people. I would spend hours calling, writing

letters, cajoling, befriending assistants.”

Who were these people worth hours of effort to meet once for an hour?

In the beginning when Grazer was just a deliveryman, they were people he

11-1 Describe the functions and process of communication.

11-2 Contrast downward, upward, and lateral communication through small-group networks and the grapevine.

11-3 Contrast oral, written, and nonverbal communication.

11-4 Describe how channel richness underlies the choice of communication method.

11-5 Differentiate between automatic and controlled processing of persuasive messages.

11-6 Identify common barriers to effective communication.

11-7 Discuss how to overcome the potential problems of cross-cultural communication.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

344 PART 3 The Group

met while hand-delivering a law firm’s documents to its Warner Bros. clients.

After he landed his first job as a producer, he approached famous directors

and actors—at least one a day—who walked by his office. Soon, he reached

out to leaders from every walk of life . . . but not from the entertainment

industry, and not with an idea for a movie. Just for the sake of satisfying

his curiosity, Grazer met with leaders at the top of their careers including:

U.S. president George W. Bush, Cuban president Fidel Castro, astronomer Carl Sagan, medical researcher Jonas Salk, writer Isaac Asimov, “the father

of the hydrogen bomb” Edward Teller, investment banker Herbert A. Allen,

Mexican business magnate Carlos Slim, astronaut Jim Lovell, Chilean activ-

ist Verónica de Negri, and famous lawyers Johnnie Cochran, F. Lee Bailey,

and Gerry Spence.

Grazer said there are no rules for these conversations, no script. How-

ever, he has learned to prepare. After a disastrous meeting with Isaac and

Janet Asimov in which Mrs. Asimov walked out after claiming she wasn’t

versed enough in her husband’s work to continue the conversation, Grazer learned to research first, have a plan, and study the art of communication.

He said, “You have to enter the psyche pretty quickly of the person you’re

talking to, to kind of know what matters to them. And if you know what

matters to them, you’re learning more, and you’re living through their mind

and process.”

In addition to knowledge on many subjects, what has Grazer learned for

business from over 600 curiosity conversations? How to interpret facial cues, to put the most challenging communications first in the day, and,

most of all, to talk with people in person. “I really do Google a lot,” he

said, “but I really find that these personal meetings are more valuable

because . . . there’s so much more information through body language and

eye contact and nuance.” He found that one of the most important manage-

ment tools is targeted communication through inquiry. “Asking questions

elicits information, of course,” he observed. “Asking questions creates the

space for people to raise issues they are worried about that a boss, or

colleagues, may not know about. Asking questions means people have to

make their case for the way they want a decision to go.” He discovered how

people’s communication predicts their behavior. “I like it when people at Imagine ask me questions, but here’s the simplest and most powerful rea-

son: If they ask the question, then they almost always listen to the answer,”

he wrote. “People are more likely to consider a piece of advice, or a flat-out

instruction, if they’ve asked for it in the first place.” Lastly, Grazer’s curios-

ity conversations have sparked limitless creativity. He said, “You can never

know how the dots will connect; how opportunities will come alive when you

never knew they existed.”

Communication CHAPTER 11 345

Sources: B. Grazer and C. Fishman, “Behind the Mind, and Out-of-This-World Hair, of Leg- endary Hollywood Producer Brian Grazer,” Vanity Fair, March 2015, http://www.vanityfair .com/hollywood/2015/02/brian-grazer-hair-autobiography; B. Grazer and C. Fishman, “Movie Producer Brian Grazer Explains How Asking the Right Questions Will Make You a Better Boss,” Fast Company, April 17, 2015, http://www.fastcompany.com/3044264/ the-big-idea/the-man-of-many-questions; D. McNary, “Ron Howard-Brian Grazer’s Imagine Entertainment Promotes Michael Rosenberg,” Variety, November 26, 2013, http://variety .com/2013/film/news/ron-howard-brian-grazers-imagine-entertainment-promotes-michael- rosenberg-1200888431/; D. Miller, “Brain Grazer on the Benefits of a Curious Mind, #SXSW 2015 Recap,” Entrepreneur, March 16, 2015; and A. Wolfe, “Brian Grazer,” The Wall Street Journal, April 11–12, 2015, C17.

As Brian Grazer found, good communication makes organizations successful. Communication is powerful: no group or organization can exist without sharing meaning among its members. In this chapter, we’ll analyze communica- tion and ways we can make it more effective.

Communication must include both the transfer and the understanding of meaning. Communicating is more than merely imparting meaning; that meaning must also be understood. It is only thus that we can convey informa- tion and ideas. In perfect communication, if it existed, a thought would be transmitted so the receiver understood the same mental picture the sender intended. Though it sounds elementary, perfect communication is never achieved in practice, for reasons we shall see.

Functions of Communication Communication serves five major functions within a group or organization: man- agement, feedback, emotional sharing, persuasion, and information exchange.1

Communication acts to manage member behavior in several ways. Organiza- tions have authority hierarchies and formal guidelines employees are required to follow. When employees follow their job descriptions or comply with company policies, communication performs a management function. Informal commu- nication controls behavior too. When workgroups tease or harass a member who produces too much (and makes the rest of the members look bad), they are informally communicating, and managing, the member’s behavior.

Communication creates feedback by clarifying to employees what they must do, how well they are doing it, and how they can improve their performance. We saw this operating in goal-setting theory in Chapter 7. Formation of goals, feedback on progress, and reward for desired behavior all require communica- tion and stimulate motivation.

The workgroup is a primary source of social interaction for many employees. Communication within the group is a fundamental mechanism by which mem- bers show satisfaction and frustration. Communication, therefore, provides for the emotional sharing of feelings and fulfillment of social needs. For example, after a white police officer shot an unarmed black man in Ferguson, Missouri in 2015, software engineer Carl Jones wanted to process his feelings through talk- ing with his coworkers at his corporation. As a second example, Starbucks had baristas write “Race Together” on coffee cups to start conversations about race relations. In both cases, the initial communications were awkward—so awkward that Starbucks pulled the campaign—but Jones and others have forged solid relationships from their emotional sharing.2

communication The transfer and the understanding of meaning.

11-1 Describe the functions and process of communication.

346 PART 3 The Group

Like emotional sharing, persuasion can be good or bad depending on if, say, a leader is trying to persuade a workgroup to believe in the organization’s com- mitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR) or to, conversely, persuade the workgroup to break the law to meet an organizational goal. These may be extreme examples, but it’s important to remember that persuasion can benefit or harm an organization.

The final function of communication is information exchange to facilitate deci- sion making. Communication provides the information individuals and groups need to make decisions by transmitting the data needed to identify and evaluate choices.

Almost every communication interaction that takes place in a group or orga- nization performs one or more of these functions, and none of the five is more important than the others. To perform effectively, groups need to maintain some control over members, provide feedback to stimulate members to per- form, allow emotional expression, monitor the persuasive efforts of individuals, and encourage information exchange.

Before communication can take place it needs a purpose, a message to be con- veyed between a sender and a receiver. The sender encodes the message (converts it to a symbolic form) and passes it through a medium (channel) to the receiver, who decodes it. The result is a transfer of meaning from one person to another.3

Exhibit 11-1 depicts this communication process. The key parts of this model are (1) the sender, (2) encoding, (3) the message, (4) the channel, (5) decod- ing, (6) the receiver, (7) noise, and (8) feedback.

The sender initiates a message by encoding a thought. The message is the actual physical product of the sender’s encoding. When we speak, the speech is the mes- sage. When we write, the writing is the message. When we gesture, the movements of our arms and the expressions on our faces are the message. The channel is the medium through which the message travels. The sender selects it, determining whether to use a formal or informal channel. Formal channels are established by the organization and transmit messages related to the professional activities of members. They traditionally follow the authority chain within the organization. Other forms of messages, such as personal or social, follow informal channels, which are spontaneous and subject to individual choice.4 The receiver is the person(s) to whom the message is directed, who must first translate the symbols into understandable form. This step is the decoding of the message. Noise represents communication barriers that distort the clarity of the message, such as perceptual problems, information overload, semantic difficulties, or cultural differences. The final link in the communication process is a feedback loop. Feedback is the check on how successful we have been in transferring our messages as originally intended. It determines whether understanding has been achieved.

communication process The steps between a source and a receiver that result in the transfer and understanding of meaning.

formal channels Communication channels established by an organization to transmit messages related to the professional activities of members.

informal channels Communication chan- nels that are created spontaneously and that emerge as responses to individual choices.

the Communication ProcessExhibit 11-1

Sender

Encoding message

Channel

Noise

Feedback

Message received

Receiver

Message decoding

S Message

to be sent

Communication CHAPTER 11 347

Direction of Communication Communication can flow vertically or laterally, through formal small-group networks or the informal grapevine. We subdivide the vertical dimension into downward and upward directions.5

Downward Communication Communication that flows from one level of a group or organization to a lower level is downward communication. Group leaders and managers use it to assign goals, provide job instructions, explain policies and procedures, point out prob- lems that need attention, and offer feedback.

In downward communication, managers must explain the reasons why a decision was made. Although this may seem like common sense, many manag- ers feel they are too busy to explain things or that explanations will raise too many questions. Evidence clearly indicates, though, that explanations increase employee commitment and the support of decisions.6 Managers might think that sending a message one time is enough to get through to lower-level employees, but research suggests managerial communications must be repeated several times and through a variety of different media to be truly effective.7

Another problem in downward communication is its one-way nature; generally, managers inform employees but rarely solicit their advice or opin- ions. Research revealed that nearly two-thirds of employees said their boss rarely or never asks their advice. The study noted, “Organizations are always striving for higher employee engagement, but evidence indicates they unnecessarily create fundamental mistakes. People need to be respected and listened to.” The way advice is solicited also matters. Employees will not provide input, even when conditions are favorable, if doing so seems against their best interests.8

In downward communication, the delivery mode and the context of the information exchange are of high importance. We will talk more about com- munication methods later, but consider the ultimate downward communication: the performance review. Alan Buckelew, CEO of Carnival Cruise Lines, says, “A review is probably the one time when you want to be physically present.” Samsonite CEO agrees: “A conference call cannot substitute for face-to-face interactions.” Automated performance reviews have allowed managers to review their subordi- nates without discussions, which is efficient but misses critical opportunities for growth, motivation, and relationship-building.9 In general, employees subjected to less than direct, personalized communication are less likely to understand the intentions of the message correctly.

The best communicators explain the reasons behind their downward communications but also solicit communication from the employees they supervise. That leads us to the next direction: upward communication.

upward Communication Upward communication flows to a higher level in the group or organization. It’s used to provide feedback to higher-ups, inform them of progress toward goals, and relay current problems. Upward communication keeps managers aware of how employees feel about their jobs, coworkers, and the organization in general. Managers also rely on upward communication for ideas on how condi- tions can be improved.

Given that most managers’ job responsibilities have expanded, upward communication is increasingly difficult because managers can be over- whelmed and easily distracted. To engage in effective upward communication, try to communicate in short summaries rather than long explanations, sup-

11-2 Contrast downward, upward, and lateral communication through small-group networks and the grapevine.

348 PART 3 The Group

port your summaries with actionable items, and prepare an agenda to make sure you use your boss’s attention well.10 And watch what you say, especially if you are communicating something to your manager that will be unwelcome. If you’re turning down an assignment, for example, be sure to project a “can do” attitude while asking advice about your workload dilemma or inexperience with the assignment.11 Your delivery can be as important as the content of your communication.

Lateral Communication When communication occurs between members of the same workgroup, mem- bers at the same level in separate workgroups, or any other horizontally equiva- lent workers, we describe it as lateral communication.

Lateral communication saves time and facilitates coordination. Some lateral relationships are formally sanctioned. More often, they are informally created to short-circuit the vertical hierarchy and expedite action. So from manage- ment’s viewpoint, lateral communications can be good or bad. Because strictly adhering to the formal vertical structure for all communications can be inef- ficient, lateral communication occurring with management’s knowledge and support can be beneficial. But dysfunctional conflict can result when formal vertical channels are breached, when members go above or around their supe- riors, or when bosses find actions have been taken or decisions made without their knowledge.

Formal small-Group networks Formal organizational networks can be complicated, including hundreds of people and a half-dozen or more hierarchical levels. We’ve condensed these net- works into three common small groups of five people each (see Exhibit 11-2): chain, wheel, and all-channel.

The chain rigidly follows the formal chain of command; this network approximates the communication channels you might find in a rigid three-level organization. The wheel relies on a central figure to act as the conduit for all group communication; it simulates the communication network you might find

Burger King improved lateral communication among its executives by eliminating their closed-door offices and organizing their desks in an open-space setting. Shown here, from left, are executives Jonathan Fitzpatrick, Jose Tomas, and Daniel Schwartz communicating in their new work area at company headquarters in Miami. Source: C.W. Griffin/MCT/Newscom

Communication CHAPTER 11 349

on a team with a strong leader. The all-channel network permits group members to actively communicate with each other; it’s most often characterized by self- managed teams, in which group members are free to contribute and no one person takes on a leadership role. Many organizations today like to consider themselves all-channel, meaning that anyone can communicate with anyone (but sometimes they shouldn’t).

As Exhibit 11-3 demonstrates, the effectiveness of each network is deter- mined by the dependent variable that concerns you. The structure of the wheel facilitates the emergence of a leader, the all-channel network is best if you desire high member satisfaction, and the chain is best if accuracy is most important. Exhibit 11-3 leads us to the conclusion that no single network will be best for all occasions.

the Grapevine The informal communication network in a group or organization is called the grapevine.12 Although rumors and gossip transmitted through the grapevine may be informal, it’s still an important source of information for employees and candidates. Grapevine or word-of-mouth information from peers about a com- pany has important effects on whether job applicants join an organization,13 even over and above informal ratings on websites like Glassdoor.

The grapevine is an important part of any group or organization communi- cation network. It serves employees’ needs: small talk creates a sense of closeness and friendship among those who share information, although research suggests it often does so at the expense of those in the outgroup.14 It also gives managers a feel for the morale of their organization, identifies issues employees consider important, and helps them tap into employee anxieties. Evidence indicates that

grapevine An organization’s informal communication network.

three Common small-Group networksExhibit 11-2

Chain Wheel All channel

small-Group networks and Effective CriteriaExhibit 11-3

Networks

Wheel

Criteria

Chain All-Channel

Speed Accuracy Emergence of a leader Member satisfaction

Moderate High Moderate Moderate

Fast High High Low

Fast Moderate None High

350 PART 3 The Group

managers can study the gossip driven largely by employee social networks to learn more about how positive and negative information is flowing through the organization.15 Managers can furthermore identify influencers (highly net- worked people trusted by their coworkers16) by noting which individuals are small talkers (those who regularly communicate about insignificant, unrelated issues). Small talkers tend to be influencers. One study found that social talkers are so influential that they were significantly more likely to retain their jobs dur- ing layoffs.17 Thus, while the grapevine may not be sanctioned or controlled by the organization, it can be understood and leveraged a bit.

Could managers entirely eliminate the gossip and rumors common to the grapevine if they so chose? No. Should they want to? Maybe not; in addition to the opportunities for managers to learn from the grapevine, some forms of gossip provide prosocial motivation for employees to help each other achieve organizational goals.18 What managers should do is minimize the negative con- sequences of rumors by limiting their range and impact. Exhibit 11-4 offers a few practical suggestions.

Dealing with Gossip and rumorsExhibit 11-4

1. Share the information you have, and the information you don’t—where there is good formal communication with much information, there is no need for rumors. When you don’t know information that others are seeking, discuss when you will know and follow up.

2. Explain, explain, explain. As a manager, discuss what decisions are made and why they were made, as well as the plan going forward.

3. Respond to rumors noncommittally, and then verify for yourself the truths you can. Make certain to gather all sides of the story.

4. Invite employees to discuss their concerns, ideas, suggestions, thoughts, and feelings about organizational matters. Help them frame their thoughts into more objective viewpoints.

Watch It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the video exercise titled Communication (TWZ Role Play).

Modes of Communication How do group members transfer meaning among each other? They rely on oral, written, and nonverbal communication. This much is obvious, but as we will discuss, the choice between modes can greatly enhance or detract from the way the perceiver reacts to the message. Certain modes are highly preferred for specific types of communication. We will cover the latest thinking and practical application.

oral Communication A primary means of conveying messages is oral communication. Speeches, formal one-on-one and group discussions, and the informal rumor mill or grapevine are popular forms of oral communication.

11-3 Contrast oral, written, and nonverbal communication.

Communication CHAPTER 11 351

The advantages of oral communication are speed, feedback, and exchange. We can convey a verbal message and receive a response in minimal time. As one professional put it, “Face-to-face communication on a consis- tent basis is still the best way to get information to and from employees.”19 If the receiver is unsure of the message, rapid feedback allows the sender to quickly detect and correct it. The feedback we receive includes information and emotional content; however, we should acknowledge that we are usually bad listeners. Researchers indicate that we are prone to “listener burnout” in which we tune the other person out and rush to offer advice. “Good listeners overcome their natural inclination to fix the other’s problems and to keep the conversation brief,” said Professor Graham Bodie. Active listening—in which we remove distractions, lean in, make eye contact, paraphrase, and encourage the talker to continue20—helps us learn more and build trust if we are genuine and not judgmental.21 The exchange given through oral com- munication has social, cultural, and emotional components. Cultural social exchange, in which we  purposefully share social exchanges that transcend cultural boundaries, can build trust, cooperation, and agreement between individuals and teams.22

One major disadvantage of oral communication surfaces whenever a mes- sage has to pass through a number of people: the more people, the greater the potential distortion. If you’ve ever played the game “Telephone,” you know the problem. Each person interprets the message in his or her own way. The message’s content, when it reaches its destination, is often very different from the original, even when we think the message is simple and straightforward. Therefore, oral communication “chains” are generally more of a liability than an effective tool in organizations. Let’s discuss some popular oral communica- tion applications in specific.

meetings Meetings can be formal or informal, include two or more people, and take place in almost any venue. Although 11 million meetings take place in the United States daily, some people hate them. So we try to make them more effective: Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos begins meetings with 30 minutes of everyone silently reading his report to them, Twitter and Apple have meetings only on Mondays, BuzzFeed has 2 no-meeting days per week, and some organizations limit the duration of meetings.23

Framing even our casual business interactions as meetings helps us stay focused on progress. Every meeting is an opportunity to “get stuff done,” as BetterWorks CEO Kris Duggan said, and to “sparkle.” He noted, “You may be an expert in your field, but if you don’t communicate well, or if you don’t get people excited, or you’re not passionate or enthusiastic, that’s going to be a hindrance.”24 Other stumbling blocks to effective meetings are overuse of jargon25 and qualifiers that undermine your words (for example, phrases like “to be perfectly honest” or “to tell the truth” imply that you aren’t truthful the other 99 percent of the time!).26

Good interpersonal communication is key to making meetings effective. Some experts recommend using humor as an ice breaker; public relations firm Peppercomm even offers stand-up comedy workshops to help businesses teach people how to use humor.27 But what if you don’t have a voice in meet- ings? We don’t mean someone who is speaking or hearing disabled, as we discuss in Career OBjectives. Voice refers to the ability to contribute words of value to the meeting.28 By definition, voice challenges the status quo, supports others’ viewpoints, adds constructively, or is defensive/destructive.29 As you can see, voice refers to the input and reactions of a person within the meet- ing and the lack of voice creates a barrier to input (when no one is speaking, few people want to be the first to break the silence). A person without voice

352 PART 3 The Group

may have nothing to say, but research indicates that women in particular don’t speak up in meetings even when they are in leadership positions, suggesting that certain group dynamics inhibit equal participation.30 Without equitable participation, the benefits of meetings are questionable.

Videoconferencing and Conference Calling Videoconferencing permits employees and clients to conduct real-time meetings with people at different locations. Live audio and video images let us see, hear, and talk with each other with- out being physically in the same location. Conference calling is generally limited to telephone exchanges where some people may gather around one speaker phone, and others call in through a secure line. There may be some shared files or videos everyone can see on their computers. Both modes are used selectively, according to the application.

Peter Quirk, an information technology director with EMC Corporation, uses videoconferencing to hold monthly meetings of employees at various loca- tions while saving travel expenses and time. He notes it’s important to delib- erately stimulate questions and involve all participants in this forum to avoid having someone who is on the call but disengaged, a common problem. Other leaders wish they had that problem; instead, they have to mediate between call- ers who talk over one another, and address those who make too much noise. Erica Pearce, a sales executive, told one conference caller, “If you’re vacuuming, I appreciate that, and you’re welcome to come to my house afterward. But you need to be on mute.”31

You might assume people prefer videoconferencing to conference calling since video offers a more “live” experience, but 65 percent of all remote meet- ings are done via audio only. For reasons not clearly understood besides some people’s reluctance to be on camera, the time people spend on audio-only calls may be growing almost 10 percent per year.32 To address the pitfalls of video- conferencing and conference calls, experts offer the following suggestions:

1. Set more explicit agendas and firmer rules than for face-to-face meetings. 2. Have callers begin by introducing themselves, their roles in the project, and

what they are looking for in the meeting. They should also state their names each time they speak.

3. Leaders should talk 40 percent of the time and listen 60 percent of the time.

Al Lieb (in blue shirt) is co-founder and CEO of ClearSlide, Inc., a maker of cloud-based communications software for sales teams. Shown here leading a staff meeting at company headquar- ters in San Francisco, Lieb believes meetings keep employees focused on ClearSlide’s fast-paced growth and increasing customer base. Source: John Green/Bay Area News Group/MCT/Landov

Communication CHAPTER 11 353

4. Distribute discussion questions before the meeting, and note the responses of each participant during the meeting.

5. Assign a moderator for the meeting (not the leader) and a secretary (again, not the leader).

6. Understand people’s preferences for videoconferencing versus conference calling before the meeting and make sure everyone understands the tech- nology. “I cannot tell you how many times I’ve heard people say, ‘I don’t know what’s wrong with my webcam, so I’m just going to be here in voice’” when they might just prefer conference calling, said Laura Stack, author of Execution Is the Strategy.33

telephone The telephone has been around so long that we can overlook its efficiency as a mode of communication. Communication by telephone is fast, effective, and less ambiguous than e-mail. However, telephone messages can be easily overlooked, and a lack of functions has made the phone difficult to use

I thought it was a good, responsible move when my manager hired a guy who is hearing-impaired . . . but now I’m not so sure. We do okay in com- municating with him, mostly thanks to e-mail and texting. None of us knows sign language but sometimes we spell out words with our hands. The prob- lem is that the guy makes a LOT of inappropriate noises—farts, burps, coughs, moans, you name it. Isn’t this too much to put up with?

— Jackie Dear Jackie: In short: No. Workplace accommoda- tion means more than simply toler- ating a disabled worker’s presence. Perhaps you might consider this from your deaf coworker’s point of view (by the way, “deaf” is the preferred term, according to the National Association of the Deaf):

• How are the communication con- ditions for him to work? Are you being sure to include him in dis- cussions by, say, assigning one of you to write down the impor- tant points for him and ask his opinions in meetings? Search for “10 Annoying Habits of Hearing

People” online to get a glimpse of his perspective.

• Do you know what he thinks about your “hand spelling?” You may not know that American Sign Language (ASL) is not simply English. Your coworker probably doesn’t appreci- ate your “pigeon” sign language and may be offended by your attempts, but he would likely appreciate an effort for the group to learn some ASL and/or use a translator. There are apps and online translators where you can type in a phrase and see someone sign your words on the screen, for instance. Similarly, new technology from MotionSavvy trans- lates signs into written speech.

• It seems you might be attributing emotions to your coworker when he makes noises, emotions he may not feel. Do you think he is uncar- ing about his listening coworkers? It’s much more likely that he simply doesn’t realize he is making noises or thinks they are quieter than they are. Consider what it’s like when you are in a loud room; you’re prob- ably less aware of your sounds than when you’re in a quiet room where everyone can react.

If you can get past the barrier of thinking about how he should accommodate himself to your environ- ment and instead show him how your group is willing to work to communicate with him, you may begin to develop an understanding of one another. Then, and only then, it would make sense to approach the noise problem respectful- ly and kindly, with a non-offensive one- on-one. But before you do, search the Internet for tips on communicating with the deaf, and show him some respect.

C. Swinbourne, “The 10 Annoying Habits of Hearing People,” The Huffington Post, Sep- tember 17, 2013, http://www.huffingtonpost .com/charlie-swinbourne/the-10-annoying- habits-of_b_3618327.html; National Asso- ciation of the Deaf website, www.nad .org, ac- cessed June 30, 2015; and R. Walker, “An Office Distraction,” The New York Times, March 22, 2015, 8.

The opinions provided here are of the manag- ers and authors only and do not necessar- ily reflect those of their organizations. The authors or managers are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information. In no event will the authors or managers, or their related partnerships or corporations thereof, be liable to you or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the opinions provided here.

isn’t this disability too much to accommodate? Career oBjectives

354 PART 3 The Group

without electronic follow up. Recently, however, a number of software options have come to the rescue to make phoning more versatile. Switch uses the com- puter to dial phone numbers, and users can change telephones during calls and view document exchanges. Voice allows people to use a single phone number that’s linked to multiple phones. Talko’s app provides a forum for voice memos, texts, and photos. And Twilio offers businesses cheaper calling and automatic text messages. Supporters say these methods increase business communication capabilities beyond e-mail. “How many times have you been on a giant e-mail thread that’s not making any progress?” asked the founder of Switch. With these tools, he said, “You’ve distilled all the waste out of the phone conversation, and what’s left are these really important times when you need to talk to someone in real time, and get some emotion and back-and-forth.”34

Written Communication Written communication includes letters, e-mail, instant messaging, organiza- tional periodicals, and any other method that conveys written words or symbols. Written business communication today is usually conducted via letters, Power- Point, e-mail, instant messaging, text messaging, social media, apps, and blogs. We are all familiar with these methods, but let’s consider the unique current business communication applications of them.

Letters With all the technology available, why would anyone write and send a letter? Of all the forms of written communication, letter writing is the oldest— and the most enduring. Letter writing can be used to great effect in business, adding a personal touch to a communication or, alternately, creating a lasting document to signal an official communication. Interestingly, research indicates that when we write by hand, the content is much more memorable to us than when we type.35

PowerPoint PowerPoint and other slide formats like Prezi can be an excellent mode of communication because slide-generating software combines words with visual elements to engage the reader and help explain complex ideas. PowerPoint is often used in conjunction with oral presentations, but its appeal is so intuitive that it can serve as a primary mode of communication. It is not without its detractors, however, who argue that it is too impersonal, disengag- ing, and frequently hard to follow.

E-mail The growth of e-mail since its inception nearly 50 years ago has been spectacular, and its use is so pervasive it’s hard to imagine life without it. There are more than 3.1 billion active e-mail accounts worldwide, and corporate employees average 105 e-mails each day.36 Exhibit 11-5 shows the time manag- ers and professionals spend daily on various tasks. Many managers report they spend too much time on e-mail. Do you?

The business benefits of e-mail messages are obvious: they can be quickly and cheaply written, edited, sent, and stored. E-mail is not without cost, how- ever. In fact, according to e-mail software company Messagemind, corporations lose $650 billion each year from time spent processing unnecessary e-mails.37 One study also indicated that people focus longer on tasks and are less stressed when they are cut off from checking e-mail.38

Despite the costs, e-mail is likely here to stay, and is “often the first impres- sion that others get of you,” according to executive coach and etiquette expert Jaqueline Whitmore.39 Still, even seasoned e-mail aficionados struggle with striking the proper tone in their communications.

Communication CHAPTER 11 355

Whitmore offers the following advice:

1. Don’t skip the subject line, but make it short and topic-related. 2. Give a greeting/salutation. “Dear” and “hello” are good starting points. In

later exchanges, “hi” may be appropriate. Use the person’s name. “Err on the side of being more formal” in your greeting and the body of the e-mail, Whitmore advises. Same for your closing; “Best regards” is more formal.

3. Keep sentences, paragraphs, and thoughts short. Use bullet points when possible.

4. However, don’t be curt. “No one can see your facial expressions or hear your tone of voice, so the only way they’re gauging your emotions is the tone that you use in that e-mail,” she said.

5. Don’t use text language. “Even if you’ve just graduated from college and you’re now out in the workforce,” Whitmore observed, “remember that a lot of your clients may be baby boomers. It’s important for you to stay professional.”

6. Check your spelling. Check it again. 7. When people write back, reply within 24 hours. “Even if you don’t have an

answer for someone, reply anyway,” she said.40

instant messaging Like e-mail, instant messaging (IM) is usually done via com- puter. There are distinct pros and cons to IM, but mostly negatives for business in- teractions. If you are present when the IM comes in, you can respond in real time to engage in online typed dialogue, but the conversation will not be saved for later reference. If you miss the incoming IM, you may be alerted when you next log on that a person tried to reach you, which may be long after a response was needed.

text messaging Text messaging maybe a little bit better than IM but has many of the same pitfalls in business usage. The guidelines for the business use of texting are still evolving, but experts continually caution that business text language should be as formal as any other business communication. The level of informality and abbreviations we use in personal text messages is usually not advisable at work.41

allocation of time at Work for managers and ProfessionalsExhibit 11-5

28%

19% 14%

39%

Reading and answering e-mail

Searching and gathering information

Communicating and collaborating internally

Role-specific tasks

Source: Based on M. Chui et al., “The Social Economy: Unlocking Value and Productivity through Social Technologies,” McKinsey &

Company, July 2012, http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/high_tech_telecoms_internet/the_social_economy.

356 PART 3 The Group

social media Websites Nowhere has online communication been more transformed than in the rise of social networks like Facebook and LinkedIn, and business is taking advantage of the opportunities these social media pres- ent. Many organizations have developed their own in-house social network- ing applications, known as enterprise social software, and most have their own Facebook pages and Twitter feeds.42 Social networking has become a tool for prospective employees, hiring managers, employees, and human resource divisions (see OB Poll).

Facebook has more than 1.44 billion active users per month,43 and it’s important to remember in business that users can send messages to other users either by posting on their walls (public), sending messages, or setting up chats (private). They can also communicate with multiple other users (“friends”) by posting status updates, videos, and photos. Some of the modes of communi- cation may be appropriate for business application (such as an organization’s Facebook page) but many are not. Research has found that none of the world’s 50 most profitable companies’ CEOs are using Facebook.44 This represents a dramatic shift from 2010, when these CEOs were using Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter quite equally. Leslie Gaines-Ross, who represents the study, observed, “I  think that CEOs are identifying which platform really works for them.”45 Privacy remains a high concern for many Facebook users, and some regions of the world do not have access to it.46

Unlike many social media venues, LinkedIn was created as an online business network and now has 187 million active users per month.47 User profiles on the site are like virtual résumés. Communication is sometimes limited to endorse- ments of others’ skills and establishment of business connections, though direct private communication is available and users can form and belong to groups. LinkedIn is used increasingly by top CEOs and is the top popular network for them (22 percent of the top 50 companies’ CEOs use LinkedIn).48

Twitter is a hybrid social networking service for users to post “micro-blog” entries of 140 characters to their subscribers about any topic, including work. Twitter has 236 million active users monthly on average49 and is growing as

Ob POLL Do You Use social-networking sites to research job candidates?

Note: CareerBuilder survey of over 2,000 hiring professionals.

Source: Based on CareerBuilder at http://www.careerbuilder.com/JobPoster/Resources/page.aspx?pagever=2012SocialMedia&template=none.

No, but soon 37% No

52%

Yes 11%

Communication CHAPTER 11 357

a business venue. While only 10 percent of the top companies’ CEOs are on Twitter,50 some have many followers, such as Richard Branson of Virgin Group, who has 5.99 million. As former Medtronic CEO Bill George noted, “Can you think of a more cost-effective way of getting to your customers and employees?”51 Having many followers can be an advantage to a firm or a manager, but a huge liability when posts (tweets) are badly written or negative.

apps LinkedIn and Twitter are two of the most widely used social media platforms for businesses, but they are not the only ones. Apps—easily accessed mobile-friendly platforms—are increasingly the forum of choice for the public. Some websites have apps, while other apps exist without corre- sponding websites. One of the biggest apps is WhatsApp, at 450 million active monthly users. Apps are most popular in regions where mobile phone usage is primary.52 Asia has the world’s largest number of social media users, and apps have a big part of that through Line (Japan), WeChat (China), and Kakao (South Korea).53

Blogs A blog (short for web log) is a website about a single person or company. Experts see blogging as a business necessity for organizations, so it should not be overlooked as a vital form of communication to employees and customers, who can post feedback if they choose.54 However, outdated blogs look bad to employees, customers, and the public, so new ones must be continually added to maintain relevancy.

N ever before have the writing skills of managers and employees been more on display. Wheth- er we are tapping on a keyboard or a screen, this communication with oth- ers is often unedited. (Thank goodness for spellcheck.) With all the written communication methods we currently employ, it would be easy to think upper management values writing skills over speaking skills. However, evidence sug- gests this is not the case.

As we discussed in Chapter 1, soft skills matter most to employers, re- gardless of industry. According to Nick Schultz of the American Enterprise In- stitute, “Considerable evidence sug- gests that many employers would be happy just to find applicants who have the sort of ‘soft’ skills that used to be almost taken for granted.” Though soft skills refer to all interpersonal skills

evident through speaking and writing, they are most on display in one-on-one discussions, interviews, meetings, and presentations. The ability to speak well, particularly English, has become a job prerequisite for many multinational cor- porations.

The good news is that speaking ability—knowledge of when to speak, how to speak, how to sound, what to say—can be improved through train- ing. According to leadership coach and author Kristi Hedges, most people can train on their own and do not need formal presentation classes. You can make significant improvements by re- searching speaking techniques, watch- ing videos of practice sessions, and practicing new techniques in meetings. If learning to speak a foreign language fluently is a problem, full immersion courses and overseas assignments

can be helpful if they are an option, as well as listening to and mimicking tele- vision and radio broadcasts in the other language. Speaking well hinges on clar- ity and sincerity of expression.

Therefore, while it is a mistake to believe writing skills have become more important than speaking skills, we can all make significant improvements in our verbal communications relatively quickly.

Sources: R. J. Aldrick and J. Kasuku, “Escaping from American Intelligence: Culture, Eth- nocentrism and the Anglosphere,” Interna- tional Affairs, September 2012, 1009–28; K. Hedges, “Confessions of a Former Public Speaking Trainer: Don’t Waste Your Money,” Forbes, April 19, 2012, www.forbes .com/ sites/work-in-progress/2012/04/19/ public-speaking-trainer-confesses-dont- waste-your-money-on-this/; and N. Schultz, “Hard Unemployment Truths about ‘Soft’ Skills,” The Wall Street Journal, September 20, 2012, A15.

today, Writing skills are More important than speaking skills

myth or science?

358 PART 3 The Group

others Flickr, Pinterest, Google+, YouTube, Wikis, Jive, Socialtext, and Social Cast are just a few of the many public and industry-specific platforms, with new ones launching daily. Some are designed for only one type of posting: YouTube accepts only videos, for instance, and Flickr only videos and images. Other sites have a particular culture, such as Pinterest’s informal posts sharing recipes or decorating tips. The business applications have not been fully realized yet, but soon there will probably be at least one social media site tailored to every type of business communication.

nonverbal Communication Every time we deliver a verbal message, we also impart an unspoken message.55 Sometimes the nonverbal component may stand alone as a powerful message of our business communication. No discussion of communication would thus be complete without consideration of nonverbal communication—which includes body movements, the intonations or emphasis we give to words, facial expres- sions, and the physical distance between the sender and receiver.

We could argue that every body movement has meaning, and no movement is accidental (though some are unconscious). We act out our state of being with nonverbal body language. For example, we smile to project trustworthiness, uncross our arms to appear approachable, and stand to signal authority.56

Body language can convey status, level of engagement, and emotional state.57 Body language adds to, and often complicates, verbal communication. In fact, studies indicate that people read much more about another’s attitude and emo- tions from their nonverbal cues than their words! If nonverbal cues conflict with the speaker’s verbal message, the cues are sometimes more likely to be believed by the listener.58

If you read the minutes of a meeting, you wouldn’t grasp the impact of what was said the same way as if you had been there or could see the meeting on video. Why not? There is no record of nonverbal communication, and the emphasis given to words or phrases is missing. Both make the meaning clear. Exhibit 11-6 illustrates how intonations can change the meaning of a message. Facial expres- sions also convey meaning. Facial expressions, along with intonations, can show arrogance, aggressiveness, fear, shyness, and other characteristics.

Physical distance also has meaning. What is considered proper spacing between people largely depends on cultural norms. For example, a business- like distance in some European countries feels intimate in many parts of

intonations: it’s the Way You say it!Exhibit 11-6

Source: Reproduced in A. Huczynski and D. Buchanan, Organizational Behavior, 4th ed. (Essex, UK: Pearson Education, 2001), 194.

Change your tone and you change your meaning:

Placement of the Emphasis What It Means

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? I was going to take someone else.

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? Instead of the guy you were going with.

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? I’m trying to find a reason why I shouldn’t take you.

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? Do you have a problem with me?

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? Instead of going on your own.

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? Instead of lunch tomorrow.

Why don’t I take you to dinner tonight? Not tomorrow night.

Communication CHAPTER 11 359

North America. If someone stands closer to you than is considered appropriate, it may indicate aggressiveness or sexual interest; if farther away, it may signal disinterest or displeasure with what is being said.

PersonAl InvenTory AssessmenTs communication Styles What is your preferred communication style? Take this PIA to learn more about our communication styles.

P I A PERSONAL INVENTORY ASSESSMENT

Choice of Communication Channel Now that we’ve discussed various modes of business communication, why do people choose one channel of communication over another? A model of media richness helps explain channel selection among managers.59

Channel richness Channels differ in their capacity to convey information. Some are rich in that they can (1) handle multiple cues simultaneously, (2) facilitate rapid feed- back, and (3) be very personal. Others are lean in that they score low on these factors. As Exhibit 11-7 illustrates, face-to-face conversation scores highest in channel richness because it transmits the most information per communica- tion episode—multiple information cues (words, postures, facial expressions, gestures, intonations), immediate feedback (both verbal and nonverbal), and the personal touch of being present. Impersonal written media such as formal reports and bulletins rate lowest in richness.

In sum, rich channels give us the chance to observe. The unconscious aspects of communication help us understand the full meaning of a message. When these aspects are missing, we must look for other clues to deduce the sender’s emotions and attitudes.

11-4 Describe how channel richness underlies the choice of communica- tion method.

channel richness The amount of information that can be transmitted during a communication episode.

information richness and Communication ChannelsExhibit 11-7

Sources: Reproduced from R. L. Daft and R. A. Noe, Organizational Behavior (Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt, 2001), 311.

Formal reports, bulletins

Low channel richness

High channel richness

Prerecorded speeches

Online discussion groups, groupware

Live speeches Video conferences

Memos, letters E-mail Voice mail Telephone conversations

Face-to-face conversations

360 PART 3 The Group

Choosing Communication methods The choice of channel depends on whether the message is routine. Routine messages tend to be straightforward and have minimal ambiguity; channels low in richness can carry them efficiently. Nonroutine communications are likely to be complicated and have the potential for misunderstanding. Managers can communicate them effectively only by selecting rich channels.

Channel richness is a helpful framework for choosing your mode of commu- nication. It is not always easy to know when to choose oral rather than written communication, for instance. Experts say oral communication or “face time” with coworkers, clients, and upper management is key to success. However, if you seek out the CEO just to say hello, you may be remembered as an annoy- ance rather than a star, and signing up for every meeting on the calendar to increase your face time is counterproductive to getting the work of the organi- zation done. Your communication choice is worth a moment’s thought: Is the message you need to communicate better suited to a discussion, or a diagram? Let’s explore some decision points.

Whenever you need to gauge the receiver’s receptivity, oral communication is usually the better choice. The marketing plan for a new product, for instance, may need to be worked out with clients in person, so you can see their reac- tions to each idea you propose. Also consider the receiver’s preferred mode of communication; some individuals focus on content better in written form and others prefer discussion. For example, if your manager requests a meeting with you, you may not want to ask for an e-mail exchange instead. The pace of your work environment matters, too. A fast-paced workplace may thrive on pop-by meetings, while a deadline-heavy team project may progress faster with sched- uled Skype videoconferences.

Much of what we communicate face-to-face is in the delivery, so also consider your speaking skills when choosing your communication method. Research indicates the sound of your voice is twice as important as what you are saying. A good speaking voice—clear, moderated—can be a help to your career, while loud, questioning, irritating, immature, falsetto, breathy, or monotone voice tones can hinder you. If your voice is problematic, your work teams can help you raise your awareness so you can make changes, or you may benefit from the help of a voice coach.60

Written communication is generally the most reliable mode for complex and lengthy communications, and it can be the most efficient method for short mes- sages when, for instance, a two-sentence text can take the place of a 10-minute phone call. But keep in mind that written communication can be limited in its emotional expression.

Choose written communication when you want the information to be tan- gible, verifiable, and “on the record.” People are usually forced to think more thoroughly about what they want to convey in a written message than in a spoken one, so your written communications can be well thought out, logical, and clear. But be aware that, as with oral communication, your delivery is just as impor- tant as the content. We discussed the level of formality, but note that managers report grammar mistakes and lack of business formality is unprofessional . . . and unacceptable. “People get passionate about grammar,” corporate writing instruc- tor and author Jack Appleman noted, and one study found that 45 percent of employers were adding training programs to teach grammar and communica- tion skills. On the other hand, some experts argue that the use of social media jargon and abbreviations is good for business. Overall, for your professional suc- cess, know your audience when possible, and use good grammar.

Letters are used in business primarily for networking purposes and when signatures need to be authentic. A handwritten thank-you note is never a

Communication CHAPTER 11 361

wrong choice for an applicant to send after an employment interview, for instance, and handwritten envelopes often are put right on the receiver’s desk unopened by administrative staff. Although electronic written communica- tion provides authentication by indicating the sender and date/time sent, a handwritten signature is still preferred and sometimes required for letters and contracts.

In general, you should respond to instant messages only when they are profes- sional and initiate them only when you know they will be welcome. Remember that your conversation will not be stored for later reference.

There are significant gains and challenges from text messaging in business settings. Texts are cheap to send and receive, and the willingness to be avail- able for quick communications from clients and managers is conducive to good business. However, some users—and managers—view text messaging as intrusive and distracting. The rules of business etiquette are not yet estab- lished, resulting in offenses ranging from texts sent at unreasonable hours to serial texting in bursts of short messages that keep receivers’ phones buzzing annoyingly. Such a continual presence can also make it hard for employees to concentrate and stay focused. Consider these recent research findings from a survey of professionals:

• 84 percent think it’s inappropriate to write texts or e-mails during formal meetings

• 75 percent think it’s inappropriate to read texts or e-mails during formal meetings

• 66 percent think it’s inappropriate to write texts or e-mails during any meetings • At least 22 percent think it’s inappropriate to use phones during any meetings61

As you can see, it is best to severely limit personal text messages during office hours and be cautious in using texting for business purposes. You should discuss using texting for business with people before you text them for the first time, set up general availability ground rules, and take your cues about when to text from the other person. For longer messages, it is better to use e-mail; even though the

To enhance her personal office visits with patients, pediatric physician Dr. Natasha Burgert communicates with them through e-mail, texting, and her blog. Written communica- tion enables her to share reliable and timely medical information with patients’ families so they can provide better care for their children. Source: Orlin Wagner/AP Images

362 PART 3 The Group

receiver still might scroll through the message on a smartphone, the option of viewing—and saving—your message on a computer is preferable.

On the corporate level, the returns on using social media are mixed. Some of the most spectacular gains are in the sales arena, both business-to-public and business-to-business. For instance, one sales representative for virtual-meetings company PGi landed his fastest sale ever by instantly connecting with a poten- tial client after TweetDeck alerted him that a CEO was tweeting his frustration about web conferencing.62 Companies are also developing their own internal social networking platforms to encourage employees to collaborate and to improve training, reporting a 300 percent annual increase in corporate net- work activity.

Some organizations have policies governing the use of social media, but many don’t. It is difficult for management to control the content employees post; even well-intentioned employees post comments that could be construed as harmful to their organization’s reputation or that reveal confidential or sen- sitive information. Software that mines social media sites can check up on a job applicant, and the growing field of digital forensics helps investigate potential problems with current employees, but cybersleuthing can be time-consuming and expensive.63 And acting upon violations of an organization’s social media policy is tricky. Thus, if you want to use social media for business purposes, make certain you are connected with all levels of management engaged in the effort. And if you would like to mention your business in your personal social media, communicate with your organization about what you would like to do, and what you think the potential return for the company may be. Use discre- tion about which personal social media platforms and apps are acceptable for business communication. Finally, make sure you know your company’s social media policies about corporate confidentiality and your company’s view on your privacy.64

As an individual, you may choose to post a blog on your own blog page, or you may choose to comment on another person’s blog. Both options are more public than you may think, and your words are easily reachable by your name via search engines like Google. If others in the company happen to read a critical or negative blog entry or post, there is nothing to keep them from sharing that information with management. You could be dismissed as a result.

It’s important to be alert to nonverbal aspects of communication and look for these cues as well as the literal meaning of a sender’s words. You should particularly be aware of contradictions between the messages. Someone who frequently glances at her wristwatch is giving the message that she would prefer to terminate the conversation no matter what she actually says, for instance. We misinform others when we express one message verbally, such as trust, but non- verbally communicate a contradictory message that reads, “I don’t have confi- dence in you.”

information security Security is a huge concern for nearly all organizations with private or propri- etary information about clients, customers, and employees. Organizations worry about the security of electronic information they seek to protect such as hospital patient data, physical information they still keep in file cabinets, and information they entrust their employees with knowing. Most companies actively monitor employee Internet use and e-mail records, and some even use video surveillance and record phone conversations. Necessary though they may be, such practices can seem invasive to employees. An organization can relieve employee concerns by engaging them in the creation of information-security policies and giving them some control over how their personal information is used.65

Communication CHAPTER 11 363

Persuasive Communication We’ve discussed a number of methods for communication up to this point. Now we turn our attention to one of the functions of communication— persuasion—and the features that might make messages more or less persua- sive to an audience.

11-5 Differentiate between automatic and con- trolled processing of persuasive messages.

Social media are good for business communication, but their use is an ethical minefield for employ- ers and employees. In a study of 24 industries in 115 countries, 63 percent of managers believed social media will be important to their businesses in 3 years. Research suggests that social media use may be an indicator of an organization’s profitability. Companies at the forefront include McDonald’s, IBM, Salesforce, SAP, and Yammer. Social media can turn customers into fans through increased and personal- ized communication, and quick and appropriate responses to customers’ communication can turn those fans— and employees—into spokespeople for the brand. The key is forming emo- tional bonds or capitalizing on current relationships to spread the good word about the company to potential clients.

Social media sites pose a host of business ethical concerns. Employ- ees with a huge online presence who use social media for both personal and company promotion (known as co-branded employees) become a li- ability if they leak corporate informa- tion, present a bad image, or leave the

company. There are also ethical con- cerns about employees’ privacy and right to free speech: If an employee who monitors the company Twitter feed, and wins a customer over, later tweets from her personal account, “Score for us: another happy cus- tomer,” that may present no concern. But she would hurt the company if she lost the customer and tweeted, “Epic fail: we blew it again.”

Other employer tasks with few tested ethical guidelines include ensuring em- ployees make proper use of company time, compensating them for time they spend promoting the company through their personal social media connection, clarifying who should own personal devices used for company promotion, setting limits on company expectations of employees’ promotion efforts, deal- ing with permissions/attributions, and clearing any legal hurdles.

Experts advise organizations to draft social media policies that reflect their company ethics rather than seek to “cover all the bases” of potential l iabilities. While an organization could require job applicants to share their online passwords, for instance, this

may violate trust and personal priva- cy rules. Policies that define ethical expectations for employee online be- havior, discuss monitoring, define con- sequences for nonconformance, and explain the logic of the guidelines will be the most effective. Even still, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) finds many corporate policies aimed at the ethics of social media usage vio- late the National Labor Relations Act. A good social media policy can affirm the ethical expectations of the corpo- ration and improve its organizational culture.

Sources: S. F. Gale, “Policies Must Score a Mutual Like,” Workforce Management, August 2012, 18; B. Giamanco and K. Gregoire, “Tweet Me, Friend Me, Make Me Buy,” Harvard Business Review, July–August 2012, 88–93; D. Kiron, D. Palmer, A. N Phil- lips, and N. Kruschwitz, “What Managers Really Think about Social Business,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer 2012, 51–60; X. Luo, J. Zhang, and W.  Duan, “Social Media and Firm Equity Value,” Information Systems Research, March 2013, 146–63; C. M. Sashi, “Customer Engagement, Buyer-Seller Relationships, and Social Media,” Management Decision 50 (2012): 253–72; and A. Smith, “NLRB Finds Social Media Policies Unlawful,” HR Magazine, August 2012, 18.

Using employees in Organizational social Media strategy

an Ethical Choice

try It! If your professor has assigned this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the Simulation: Communication.

364 PART 3 The Group

automatic and Controlled Processing To understand the process of persuasion, it is useful to consider two differ- ent ways we process information.66 Think about the last time you bought a can of soda. Did you carefully research brands, or did you reach for the can that had the most appealing advertising? If we’re honest, we’ll admit glitzy ads and catchy slogans have an influence on our choices as consumers. We often rely on automatic processing, a relatively superficial consideration of evidence and information making use of heuristics like those we discussed in Chapter 6. Automatic processing takes little time and low effort, so it makes sense to use it for processing persuasive messages related to topics you don’t care much about. The disadvantage is that it lets us be easily fooled by a variety of tricks, like a cute jingle or glamorous photo.

Now consider the last time you chose a place to live. You probably sourced experts who knew something about the area, gathered information about prices, and considered the costs and benefits of renting versus buying. You were engaging in more effortful controlled processing, a detailed consideration of evidence and information relying on facts, figures, and logic. Controlled pro- cessing requires effort and energy, but it’s harder to fool someone who has taken the time and effort to engage in it. So what makes someone engage in either shallow or deep processing? Let’s explore how we might determine what types of processing an audience will use.

interest Level One of the best predictors of whether people will use an auto- matic or controlled process for reacting to a persuasive message is their level of interest in it.67 Interest levels reflect the impact a decision is going to have on your life. When people are very interested in the outcome of a decision, they’re more likely to process information carefully. That’s probably why people look for so much more information when deciding about something important (like where to live) than something relatively unimportant (like which soda to drink).

Prior Knowledge People who are well informed about a subject area are more likely to use controlled processing strategies. They have already thought through various arguments for or against a specific course of action, and therefore won’t readily change their position unless very good, thoughtful reasons are provided. On the other hand, people who are poorly informed about a topic can change their minds more readily, even in the face of fairly superficial arguments pre- sented without a great deal of evidence. A better-informed audience is likely to be much harder to persuade.

Personality Do you always read at least five reviews of a movie before decid- ing whether to see it? Perhaps you even research films by the same stars and director. If so, you are probably high in need for cognition, a personality trait of individuals who are most likely to be persuaded by evidence and facts.68 Those who are lower in their need for cognition are more likely to use automatic pro- cessing strategies, relying on intuition and emotion to guide their evaluation of persuasive messages.

message Characteristics Another factor that influences whether people use an automatic or controlled processing strategy is the characteristics of the mes- sage itself. Messages provided through relatively lean communication channels, with little opportunity for users to interact with the content of the message, encourage automatic processing. Conversely, messages provided through richer communication channels encourage more deliberative processing.

automatic processing A relatively superficial consideration of evidence and information making use of heuristics.

controlled processing A detailed consideration of evidence and information relying on facts, figures, and logic.

need for cognition A personality trait of individuals depicting the ongoing desire to think and learn.

Communication CHAPTER 11 365

Choosing the message The most important implication is to match your persua- sive message to the type of processing your audience is likely to use. When the audience is not interested in a persuasive message topic, when they are poorly informed, when they are low in need for cognition, and when information is transmitted through relatively lean channels, they’ll be more likely to use auto- matic processing. In these cases, use messages that are more emotionally laden and associate positive images with your preferred outcome. On the other hand, when the audience is interested in a topic, when they are high in need for cog- nition, or when the information is transmitted through rich channels, then it is a better idea to focus on rational arguments and evidence to make your case.

Barriers to Effective Communication A number of barriers can slow or distort effective communication, barriers that we need to recognize and reduce. In this section, we highlight the most important.

Filtering Filtering refers to a sender’s purposely manipulating information so the receiver will see it more favorably. A manager who tells his boss what he feels the boss wants to hear is filtering information.

The more vertical levels in the organization’s hierarchy, the more opportuni- ties there are for filtering. But some filtering will occur wherever there are status differences. Factors such as fear of conveying bad news and the desire to please the boss often lead employees to tell their superiors what they think they want to hear, thus distorting upward communications.

selective Perception Selective perception is important because the receivers in the communication process selectively see and hear based on their needs, motivations, experience, backgrounds, and other personal characteristics. Receivers also project their

11-6 Identify common barriers to effective communication.

filtering A sender’s manipulation of information so that it will be seen more favorably by the receiver.

Managers of Germany’s construction firm Hochtief relied on controlled processing during a meeting when they presented rational arguments about a takeover bid by another firm. Fearing that a takeover would put their jobs at risk, Hochtief employees had a high level of interest in learning about managers’ plans to prevent it. Source: Bernd Thissen/dpa/picture-alliance/Newscom

366 PART 3 The Group

interests and expectations into communications as they decode them. For ex- ample, an employment interviewer who expects a female job applicant to put her family ahead of her career is likely to see that characteristic in all female applicants, regardless of whether any of the women actually feel that way. As we said in Chapter 6, we don’t see reality; we interpret what we see and call it reality.

information overload Individuals have a finite capacity for processing data. When the information we have to work with exceeds our processing capacity, the result is information overload. We’ve seen in this text that dealing with it has become a huge chal- lenge for individuals and for organizations. It’s a challenge you can manage—to some degree—by following the steps outlined earlier in this chapter.

What happens when individuals have more information than they can sort and use? They tend to select, ignore, pass over, or forget it. Or they may put off further processing until the overload situation ends. In any case, lost informa- tion and less effective communication results, making it all the more important to deal well with overload.

More generally, as an Intel study shows, it may make sense to connect to tech- nology less frequently, to, in the words of one article, “avoid letting the drumbeat of digital missives constantly shake up and reorder to-do lists.” One radical way is to limit the number of devices you access. For example, Coors Brewing executive Frits van Paasschen jettisoned his desktop computer in favor of mobile devices only, and Eli Lilly & Co. moved its sales teams from laptops plus other devices to just iPads. Both these moves have resulted in increased productivity.69

As information technology and immediate communication have become a more prevalent component of modern organizational life, more employees find they are never able to get offline. For example, some business travelers were disappointed when airlines began offering wireless Internet connections in flight because they could no longer use their travel time as a rare opportu- nity to relax without a constant barrage of organizational communications. The negative impacts of these communication devices can spill over into employees’ personal lives as well. Both workers and their spouses relate the use of elec- tronic communication technologies outside work to higher levels of work–life conflict.70 Employees must balance the need for constant communication with their personal need for breaks from work, or they risk burnout from being on call 24 hours a day.

Emotions You may interpret the same message differently when you’re angry or dis- traught than when you’re happy. For example, individuals in positive moods are more confident about their opinions after reading a persuasive message, so well- designed arguments have a stronger impact on their opinions.71 People in negative moods are more likely to scrutinize messages in greater detail, whereas those in positive moods tend to accept communications at face value.72 Extreme emotions such as jubilation or depression are most likely to hinder effective communication. In such instances, we are most prone to disregard our rational and objective thinking processes and substitute emotional judgments.

Language Even when we’re communicating in the same language, words mean different things to different people. Age and context are two of the biggest factors that influence such differences. For example, when business consultant Michael Schiller asked his 15-year-old daughter where she was going with friends, he

information overload A condition in which information inflow exceeds an individual’s processing capacity.

Communication CHAPTER 11 367

said, “You need to recognize your ARAs and measure against them.” Schil- ler said that in response, his daughter “looked at him like he was from outer space.” (ARA stands for accountability, responsibility, and authority.) Those new to corporate lingo may find acronyms such as ARA, words such as deliver- ables (verifiable outcomes of a project), and phrases such as get the low-hanging fruit (deal with the easiest parts first) bewildering, in the same way parents may be mystified by teen slang.73

Our use of language is far from uniform. If we knew how each of us modifies the language, we could minimize communication difficulties, but we usually don’t know. Senders tend to incorrectly assume the words and terms they use mean the same to the receivers as to them.

silence It’s easy to ignore silence or lack of communication because it is defined by the absence of information. This is often a mistake—silence itself can be the message to communicate non-interest or inability to deal with a topic. Silence can also be a simple outcome of information overload, or a delaying period for considering a response. For whatever reasons, research suggests using silence and withholding communication are common and problematic.74 One survey found that more than 85 percent of managers reported remaining silent about at least one issue of significant concern.75 The impact of silence can be organi- zationally detrimental. Employee silence can mean managers lack information about ongoing operational problems; management silence can leave employees bewildered. Silence regarding discrimination, harassment, corruption, and mis- conduct means top management cannot take action to eliminate problematic behavior.

Communication apprehension An estimated 5 to 20 percent of the population suffers debilitating communica- tion apprehension, or social anxiety.76 These people experience undue tension and anxiety in oral communication, written communication, or both.77 They

communication apprehension Undue tension and anxiety about oral communica- tion, written communication, or both.

Communication barriers exist between these call center employees in Manila, Philippines, and their U.S. and Canadian customers even though they all communicate in English. Training in pronunciation, intonation, vocabulary, and grammar helps employees to get messages across effectively to their customers. Source: Dondi Tawatao/Getty Images

368 PART 3 The Group

may find it extremely difficult to talk with others face-to-face or become ex- tremely anxious when they have to use the phone, relying on memos or e-mails when a phone call would be faster and more appropriate.

Oral-communication apprehensives avoid situations, such as teaching, for which oral communication is a dominant requirement.78 But almost all jobs require some oral communication. Of greater concern is evidence that high oral-communication apprehensives distort the communication demands of their jobs in order to minimize the need for communication. Be aware that some people severely limit their oral communication and rationalize their actions by telling themselves communicating isn’t necessary for them to do their jobs effectively.

Lying The final barrier to effective communication is outright misrepresentation of information, or lying. People differ in their definition of a lie. For example, is deliberately withholding information about a mistake a lie, or do you have to actively deny your role in the mistake to pass the threshold? While the defini- tion of a lie befuddles ethicists and social scientists, there is no denying the prevalence of lying. People may tell one to two lies per day, with some indi- viduals telling considerably more.79 Compounded across a large organization, this is an enormous amount of deception happening every day. Evidence shows people are more comfortable lying over the phone than face-to-face, and more comfortable lying in e-mails than when they have to write with pen and paper.80

Can you detect liars? Research suggests most people are not very good at detecting deception in others.81 The problem is there are no nonverbal or verbal cues unique to lying—averting your gaze, pausing, and shifting your posture can also be signals of nervousness, shyness, or doubt. Most people who lie take steps to guard against being detected, so they might look a person in the eye when lying because they know that direct eye contact is (incorrectly) assumed to be a sign of truthfulness. Finally, many lies are embedded in truths; liars usually give a somewhat true account with just enough details changed to avoid detection.

In sum, the frequency of lying and the difficulty in detecting liars makes this an especially strong barrier to effective communication.

Cultural Factors Effective communication is difficult under the best of conditions. Cross-cultural factors clearly create the potential for increased communication problems. A ges- ture that is well understood and acceptable in one culture can be meaningless or lewd in another. Unfortunately, only 18 percent of companies have documented strategies for communicating with employees across cultures, and only 31 percent require that corporate messages be customized for consumption in other cultures.

Cultural Barriers There are a number of problems related to language difficulties in cross-cultur- al communications. First are barriers caused by semantics. Words mean different things to different people, particularly people from different national cultures. Some words don’t translate between cultures. For instance, the Finnish word sisu means something akin to “guts” or “dogged persistence” but is essentially untranslatable into English. Similarly, capitalists in Russia may have difficulty communicating with British or Canadian counterparts because English terms such as efficiency, free market, and regulation have no direct Russian equivalents.

11-7 Discuss how to over-come the potential problems of cross- cultural communication.

Communication CHAPTER 11 369

Second are barriers caused by word connotations. Words imply different things in different languages. Negotiations between U.S. and Japanese executives can be difficult because the Japanese word hai translates as “yes,” but its connotation is “Yes, I’m listening” rather than “Yes, I agree.”

Third are barriers caused by tone differences. In some cultures, language is for- mal; in others, it’s informal. In some cultures, the tone changes depending on the context: People speak differently at home, in social situations, and at work. Using a personal, informal style when a more formal style is expected can be inappropriate.

Fourth are differences in tolerance for conflict and methods for resolving conflicts. People from individualist cultures tend to be more comfortable with direct conflict and will make the source of their disagreements overt. Collectivists are more likely to acknowledge conflict only implicitly and avoid emotionally charged disputes. They may attribute conflicts to the situation more than to the individuals and therefore may not require explicit apologies to repair relation- ships, whereas individualists prefer explicit statements accepting responsibility for conflicts and public apologies to restore relationships.

Cultural Context Cultures tend to differ in the degree to which context influences the meaning individuals take from communication.82 In high-context cultures such as China, Korea, Japan, and Vietnam, people rely heavily on nonverbal and subtle situ- ational cues in communicating with others, and a person’s official status, place in society, and reputation carry considerable weight. What is not said may be more significant than what is said. In contrast, people from Europe and North America reflect their low-context cultures. They rely essentially on spoken and written words to convey meaning; body language and formal titles are secondary (see Exhibit 11-8).

Contextual differences mean quite a lot in terms of communication. Com- munication in high-context cultures implies considerably more trust by both parties. What may appear to be casual and insignificant conversation in fact reflects the desire to build a relationship and create trust. Oral agreements imply strong commitments in high-context cultures. And who you are—your age, seniority, rank in the organization—is highly valued and heavily influ- ences your credibility. Managers can therefore “make suggestions” rather than give orders. But in low-context cultures, enforceable contracts tend to be in

high-context cultures Cultures that rely heavily on nonverbal and subtle situational cues in communication.

low-context cultures Cultures that rely heavily on words to convey meaning in communication.

High- versus Low-Context CulturesExhibit 11-8

Chinese Korean Japanese Vietnamese Arab Greek Spanish Italian English North American Scandinavian Swiss German

High context

Low context

370 PART 3 The Group

writing, precisely worded, and highly legalistic. Similarly, low-context cultures value directness. Managers are expected to be explicit and precise in conveying intended meaning.

a Cultural Guide There is much to be gained from business intercultural communications. It is safe to assume every one of us has a different viewpoint that is culturally shaped. Because we do have differences, we have an opportunity to reach the most creative solutions possible with the help of others if we communicate effectively.

According to Fred Casmir, a leading expert in intercultural communication research, we often do not communicate well with people outside of our culture because we tend to generalize from only their cultural origin. This can be insen- sitive and potentially disastrous, especially when we make assumptions based on observable characteristics. Many of us have a richly varied ethnic background and would be offended if someone addressed us according to what culture our physical features might favor, for instance. Also, attempts to be culturally sensi- tive to another person are often based on stereotypes propagated by media. These stereotypes usually do not have a correct or current relevance.

Casmir noted that because there are far too many cultures for anyone to understand completely, and individuals interpret their own cultures differently, intercultural communication should be based on sensitivity and pursuit of com- mon goals. He found the ideal condition is an ad hoc “third culture” a group can form when they seek to incorporate aspects of each member’s cultural communication preferences. The norms this subculture establishes through appreciating individual differences create a common ground for effective com- munication. Intercultural groups that communicate effectively can be highly productive and innovative.

When communicating with people from a different culture, what can you do to reduce misinterpretations? Casmir and other experts offer the following suggestions:

1. Know yourself. Recognizing your own cultural identity and biases is criti- cal to understanding the unique viewpoints of other people.

2. Foster a climate of mutual respect, fairness, and democracy. Clearly establish an environment of equality and mutual concern. This will be your “third culture” context for effective intercultural communication that tran- scends each person’s cultural norms.

3. State facts, not your interpretation. Interpreting or evaluating what some- one has said or done draws more on your own culture and background than on the observed situation. If you state only facts, you will have the opportu- nity to benefit from the other person’s interpretation. Delay judgment until you’ve had sufficient time to observe and interpret the situation from the differing perspectives of all concerned.

4. Consider the other person’s viewpoint. Before sending a message, put yourself in the recipient’s shoes. What are his or her values, experiences, and frames of reference? What do you know about his or her education, upbringing, and background that can give you added insight? Try to see the people in the group as they really are first, and take a collaborative problem- solving approach whenever potential conflicts arise.

5. Proactively maintain the identity of the group. Like any culture, the establishment of a common-ground “third culture” for effective intercul- tural communication takes time and nurturing. Remind members of the group of your common goals, mutual respect, and need to adapt to indi- vidual communication preferences.83

Communication CHAPTER 11 371

Summary You’ve probably discovered the link between communication and employee satisfaction in this chapter: the less uncertainty, the greater the satisfaction. Distortions, ambiguities, and incongruities between verbal and nonverbal messages all increase uncertainty and reduce satisfaction. Careful attention to the methods and modes for each communication better ensures that the message is properly interpreted by the receiver.

Implications for Managers ●● Remember that your communication mode will partly determine your

communication effectiveness. ●● Obtain feedback to make certain your messages—however they are com-

municated—are understood. ●● Remember that written communication creates more misunderstand-

ings than oral communication; communicate with employees through in-person meetings when possible.

●● Make sure you use communication strategies appropriate to your audi- ence and the type of message you’re sending.

●● Keep in mind communication barriers such as gender and culture.

372 PART 3 The Group

We should Use employees’ social Media Presence

Everyone uses social media. Well, almost everyone: A Pew re-search study found that the highest percentage of adults who use social networking sites was in Israel at 53 percent, followed by 50 percent in the United states, 43 percent in russia and Great Britain, and 42 percent in spain.

Business is social, and using employees’ social contacts to in- crease business has always been a facet of marketing. organizations that don’t follow their employees’ social media presence are missing an opportunity to expand their business and strengthen their work- force. For example, the Honda employee who once told 30 friends that Honda is best can now tell 300 Facebook friends and 500 Twitter followers about the latest model. employees’ savvy about social media can have a substantial positive effect on the bottom line.

monitoring employees’ social media presence can also strengthen the workforce by identifying the best talent. managers can look for potential online celebrities—frequent bloggers and Twitter users with many followers—to approach for co-branding partnerships. scrutiny can also help employers spot problems. For example, consider the employee who is fired one day and turns violent. A manager who had been monitoring the employee’s social media posts may be able to detect warning signs. A human resources department monitoring em- ployees’ social media activity may be able to identify a substance abuse problem and provide help for the employee through the com- pany’s intervention policies.

A job candidate’s social media presence provides one more input to hiring and retention decisions that many organizations already take advantage of. In reality, there is no difference between the employee and the person—they are one and the same, on or off working hours.

employers that monitor social media can also identify employees who use their platforms to send out bad press or who leak proprietary information. For this reason, managers may someday be required to monitor employees’ social media postings and to act upon infringe- ments of company policies. many do so already.

managers should therefore develop enforceable social media poli- cies and create a corporate infrastructure to regularly research and monitor social media activity. The potential increase in business and limit on liability is ample return for dedicating staff and work hours to building a successful social media program.

POINT

There is little to be gained and much to be lost when organizations follow candidates’ and employees’ presence on social media. managers may be able to learn more about individuals through their online activity, and organizations may be able to catch some good press from employee postings, but the risk of liability for this intrusion on privacy is inescapable. managers are ill-equipped to monitor, inter- pret, and act upon employees’ social media postings, and few have any experience with relating the medium to business use.

managers may also easily misinterpret information they find. Few companies have training programs for the proper use of social media; only 40 percent have social media policies of any kind. Those that do are skating on thin ice because monitoring policies can conflict with privacy regulations.

An employee’s online image doesn’t reveal much that is relevant to the job, certainly not enough to warrant the time and money a busi- ness would spend on monitoring. most users view social media as a private, recreational venue, and their membership on Facebook and other sites should be regarded with the same respect as would mem- bership in a club. In this light, monitoring employees’ social media accounts is an unethical violation of their right to privacy.

equal employment opportunity laws require companies to hire without respect to race, age, religion, national origin, or disability. But managers who check into candidates’ social media postings often find out more than the candidate wanted to share, and then there is no way to keep that information from affecting the hiring decision. searching through social media can, therefore, expose a company to a costly discrimination claim.

Using employees’ personal social media presence as a market- ing tool through company-supportive postings is unethical from many standpoints. First, it is unethical to expect employees to expand the company’s client base through their personal contacts. second, it is unreasonable to expect them to endorse the company after working hours. And the practice of asking employees for their social media passwords is an obvious intrusion into their personal lives.

In sum, people have a right to a professional and a private image. Unless the employee is offering to “friend” the company in a social media partnership, there is no question that employers should stay out of their personal business.

COuNTerPOINT

Sources: s. F. Gale, “Policies must score a mutual like,” Workforce Management, August 2012; r. Huggins and s. Ward, “Countries with the Highest Percentage of Adults Who Use social networking sites,” USA Today, February 8, 2012, 1A; A. l. Kavanaugh et al., “social media Use by Government: From the routine to the Critical,” Government Information Quarterly, october 2012, 480–91; and s. Johnson, “Those Facebook Posts Could Cost you a Job,” San Jose Mercury News, January 16, 2012, www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_19754451.

Communication CHAPTER 11 373

chaPter revieW

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com to complete the problems marked with this icon.

QUestiOns FOr revieW

11-1 What are the functions and process of communication?

11-2 What are the communication differences between downward, upward, and lateral communication sent through small-group networks and the grapevine?

11-3 What are the methods of oral communication, written communication, and nonverbal communication?

11-4 How does channel richness underlie the choice of communication method?

11-5 What is the difference between automatic and controlled processing of persuasive messages?

11-6 What are some common barriers to effective communication?

11-7 How do you overcome the potential problems of cross-cultural communication?

exPerientiaL exercise An Absence of Nonverbal Communication The class splits up into pairs (party A and party B).

11-8. Party A is to select a topic from the following list: a. Managing in the Middle East is significantly dif-

ferent from managing in North America. b. Employee turnover in an organization can be

functional. c. Some conflict in an organization is good. d. Whistle-blowers do more harm than good for

an organization. e. An employer has a responsibility to provide

every employee with an interesting and chal- lenging job.

f. Everyone should register to vote. g. Organizations should require all employees to

undergo regular drug tests. h. Individuals who majored in business or eco-

nomics make better employees than those who majored in history or English.

i. The place where you get your college degree is more important in determining your career success than what you learn while you’re there.

j. It’s unethical for a manager to purposely distort communications to get a favorable outcome.

11-9. Party B is to choose a position on this topic (for example, arguing against the view “Some conflict in an organization is good”). Party A now must au- tomatically take the opposite position.

The two parties debate their topic. The catch is that the individuals can only communicate verbally. They may not use gestures, facial movements, body movements, or any other nonverbal communication. It may help for each party to sit on their hands to remind them of their restric- tions and to maintain an expressionless look.

11-10. After the debate is over, form groups of six to eight and discuss the following: a. How effective was communication during these

debates? b. What barriers to communication existed? c. What purposes does nonverbal communication

serve? d. Relate the lessons learned in this exercise to

problems that might occur when communicat- ing on the telephone or through e-mail.

374 PART 3 The Group

ethicaL DiLeMMa BYOD “What’s your cell phone number? Good, I’ll call you about the meeting.” If you’re like many people in the world who have used a smartphone for years, or one of the 1.3 billion people who bought one recently, chances are you’ve used it for work. In fact, your employer may have even invited— or asked—you to use your smartphone, tablet, or laptop in your job. Such is the bring-your-own-device (BYOD) trend, which started out of friendly convenience but now carries major ethical issues. For instance:

• Did you know your employer can wipe your personal devices clean? Remotely? With no warning? It hap- pens, and not just at the 21 percent of organizations that erase devices when employees are terminated. Any time an organization has a privacy concern, it may wipe all devices clean to prevent a further breach of its cyber-defenses. Health-care consultant Michael Irvin lost his personal e-mail accounts, apps, music, contacts, and photos suddenly one day, leav- ing his multi-use iPhone “like it came straight from the factory.” Another individual lost pictures of a relative who had died.

• Is your device part of your employment contract, either explicitly or by understanding? If so, who pays for the device? Well, you did, and you continue to pay for the service. If the device breaks, then . . . who pays for the replacement device? Can you lose your job if you can’t afford the device and service?

• Can you use your device for all work-related communi- cations? The cloud has brought opportunities for people to send classified work information anywhere, anytime. Organizations are concerned about what social media, collaboration, and file-sharing applica- tions are in use, which is fair, but some policies can limit how you use your own device.

• Once you use your personal device for work, where are the boundaries between work and home life? Research indi- cates that intensive smartphone users, for instance,

need to disengage in their off-hours to prevent work– home stress and burnout. Yet not everyone can do this even if they are allowed to; research indicated a significant proportion of smartphone users felt pressured to access their devices around the clock, whether or not that pressure was warranted.

The clear dilemma for employees is whether to acknowledge you own a smart device, and whether to offer its use for your employer’s convenience. Put that way, it seems obvious to say no (why would you risk possibly later losing everything to a corporate swipe?), but the conve- nience of carrying one phone is for you as well. However, some people think it’s just better to carry two phones—one for work, another for personal use. Attorney Luke Cocalis tried it and concluded, “It frankly keeps me saner.”

Questions 11-11. Do you use your smartphone or other personal

devices for work? If so, do you think this adds to your stress level or helps you by providing convenience?

11-12. Cocalis likes the two-phone lifestyle and says his boss has his personal phone number only for emergencies. But assistant talent manager Chloe Ifshin reports it doesn’t work so well in practice. “I have friends who are clients and clients who are friends,” she says, so work contacts end up on her personal phone and friends call her work phone. How does this consideration affect your thinking about BYOD?

11-13. Organizations are taking steps to protect them- selves from what employees might be doing on their BYOD devices through allowing only approved computer programs and stricter policies, but no federal regulations protect employees from these. What ethical initiatives might organizations adopt to make this situation fair for everyone?

Sources: S. E. Ante, “Perilous Mix: Cloud, Devices from Home,” The Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2014, B4; D. Derks and A. B. Bakker, “Smartphone Use, Work-Home Interference, and Burnout: A Diary Study on the Role of Recovery,” Applied Psychology: An International Review 63, no. 3 (2014): 411–40; L. Duxbury, C. Higgins, R. Smart, and M. Stevenson, “Mobile Technology and Boundary Permeability,” British Journal of Management 25 (2014): 570–88; E. Holmes, “When One Phone Isn’t Enough,” The Wall Street Journal, April 2, 2014, D1, D2; C. Mims, “2014: The Year of Living Vulner- ably,” The Wall Street Journal, December 22, 2014, B1, B2; L. Weber, “Leaving a Job? Better Watch Your Cellphone,” The Wall Street Journal, January 22, 2014; and E. Yost, “Can an Employer Remotely Wipe an Employee’s Cellphone?” HR Magazine, July 2014, 19.

Communication CHAPTER 11 375

case inciDent 1 Organizational Leveraging of Social Media As you know, social media transformed the way we inter- act. The transparent, rapid-fire communication they make possible means people can spread information about com- panies more rapidly than ever.

Do organizations understand yet how to use social me- dia effectively? Perhaps not. Only three of ten CEOs in the Fortune 500 have any presence on national social media sites. Many executives are wary of these new technologies because they cannot always control the outcomes of their communications. However, whether they are directly in- volved with social media or not, companies should recog- nize that messages are out there, so it behooves them to make their voices heard. Some experts even say social me- dia tools improve productivity because they keep employ- ees connected to their companies during nonoffice hours. And social media can be an important way to learn about emerging trends. For example, André Schneider, chair- man of World Climate Ltd., uses feedback from LinkedIn discussion groups and Facebook friends to discover emerg- ing trends and issues worldwide. Padmasree Warrior, former chief technology officer of Cisco, has used social media to refine her presentations before a test audience.

The first step in developing a social media strategy is establishing a brand for your communications after you define what you want your social media presence to express. Experts recommend that organizations first lever- age their internal corporate networks to test their strategy in a medium that’s easier to control. Most companies have the technology to use social media through their corpo- rate websites and may use these platforms for communi-

cating with employees and facilitating social networks for general information sharing. As social networking expert Soumitra Dutta of Cornell notes, “My advice is to build your audience slowly and be selective about your contacts.”

Despite the potential advantages, companies also need to be aware of significant drawbacks for them. First, it’s very difficult to control social media communications. Microsoft found this out when the professional blogger it hired spent more time promoting himself than getting positive information out about the company. Second, im- portant intellectual capital might leak out. Companies need to establish strong policies and procedures to ensure that sensitive information about ongoing corporate strate- gies is not disseminated via social media. Finally, managers must be committed to monitoring motivation and interest beyond their initial forays into social media. A site that’s rarely updated can send a very negative message about the organization’s level of engagement with the world.

Questions 11-14. Are the drawbacks of the corporate leveraging of

social media sufficient to make you think it’s bet- ter for them to avoid certain media? If so, which media?

11-15. What features would you look for in a social media outlet? What types of information would you avoid making part of your social media strategy?

11-16. What do you think is the future direction of social media in business? How might emerging technolo- gies change your forecast?

Sources: B. Acohido, “Social-Media Tools Boost Productivity,” USA Today, August 13, 2012, 1B; H.  Annabi and S. T. McGann, “Social Media as the Missing Links: Connecting Communities of Practice to Business Strategy,” Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 23, no. 1–2 (2013): 56–83; S. Dutta, “What’s Your Personal Social Media Strategy,” Harvard Business Review, November 2010, 127–30; and G. Connors, “10 Social Media Commandments for Employers,” Workforce Management Online, February 2010, www.workforce.com; and L. Kwoh and M. Korn, “140 Characters of Risk: CEOs on Twitter,” The Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2012, B1, B8.

case inciDent 2 PowerPoint Purgatory We’ve all been there, done that: 10 minutes, 20 Power- Point slides. Whether you’ve been the harried presenter racing through the slides or the hapless listener choosing between reading the slides or listening to the talk, it’s mis- erable. Three hundred fifty PowerPoint presentations are

given per second worldwide, and the program commands 95 percent of the presentation software market. Why do we do this to ourselves?

The short answer seems to be because we know how, or at least we think we do. Joel Ingersoll of Lorton Data,

376 PART 3 The Group

a Minneapolis database company, said, “You say to your- self, ‘I’ll start vomiting information I found on my hard drive until I hit, oh, about 20 slides, and then I’ll wing the talking-to-people part.’” Bombarding audiences with stark phrases is only one possible pitfall, says Rick Altman, au- thor of Why Most PowerPoint Presentations Suck. Another is to overdesign your presentation. Most of us spend 36 percent of our prep time on design, according to a study, yet we fail to remember that “less is more.” The poor choices that sometimes result (such as using cartoonish typefaces for a serious presentation) can undermine your intended mes- sage. Altman cautions against using layer after layer of bul- let points to write out what you should say instead, and he recommends making sparing use of holograms, 3D, and live Twitter feeds that only detract from your message.

Successful talks are about a story and an interaction. “Even if you’re a middle manager delivering financials to your department in slides, you’re telling a story. A manager is constantly trying to persuade,” said Nancy Duarte, own- er of a presentation design company. Equally important is the audience. “Everyone is sick of the one-way diatribe,” Duarte observed, and Altman recommends engaging peo- ple animatedly “as if they’re in preschool waiting to get picked up by their parents.” According to Keith Yamashita, founder of SYPartners communications, this may mean

ditching PowerPoint altogether. “There are endless tech- niques that are more appropriate than PowerPoint,” he contends. Like what?

Experts suggest fewer visual aids and more live inter- action with the audience. High tech does not guarantee better storytelling. “Pin up butcher paper on the walls, draw a map of your thinking, and hand that out,” Yamashita says, or use a white board. The results can amaze you. When sales engineer Jason Jones had trou- ble launching his 2-hour slide presentation to a dozen clients, buddy Dave Eagle stepped in. “All right, I got two presentations for y’all,” Eagle told the clients: one presentation with slides, and the other just spoken. The clients chose the latter, and Jones and Eagle won the account.

Questions 11-17. What are some of the ways people misuse Power-

Point? What are the potential consequences? 11-18. In what presentations of yours have you found

PowerPoint most effective in communicating your message? In what presentations did PowerPoint hinder your successful communication?

11-19. List the pros and cons you see for managers who avoid PowerPoint as a mode of communication.

Sources: A. A. Buchko, K. J. Buchko, and J. M Meyer, “Is There Power in PowerPoint? A Field Test of the Efficacy of PowerPoint on Memory and Recall of Religious Sermons,” Computers in Human Behavior, March 2012, 688–95; “Full Text of Iran’s Proposals to Six World Powers in Moscow,” FARS News Agency (Tehran), http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9103085486; and B. Parks, “Death to PowerPoint,” Bloomberg Businessweek, September 3–9, 2012, 83–85.

MyManagementLab Go to mymanagementlab.com for Auto-graded writing questions as well as the following Assisted-graded writing questions:

11-20. Based on Case Incident 1 and your chapter reading, how do you think social media might be used in business 5 years from now? Do you see the usage as growing or lessening, and why?

11-21. Considering Case Incident 2 and the chapter material, what are the positive aspects of PowerPoint as a com- munication method? One study found no difference in memory recall of listeners after presentations with (a) PowerPoint words only, (b) visual-only slides, (c) words and visual aids, and (d) no slides. How does this change your view of the usefulness of PowerPoint as a communication tool?

11-22. MyManagementLab Only – comprehensive writing assignment for this chapter.

Communication CHAPTER 11 377

enDnOtes 1R. Wijn and K. van den Bos, “On the Social- Communicative Function of Justice: The Influ- ence of Communication Goals and Personal Involvement on the Use of Justice Assertions,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 36, no. 2 (2010): 161–72. 2R. Swarns, “After Uneasy First Tries, Cowork- ers Find a Way to Talk about Race,” The New York Times, March 23, 2015, A15. 3D. C. Barnlund, “A Transactional Model of Communication.” In C. D. Mortenson (ed.), Communication Theory (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 2008): 47–57; see K. Byron, “Carrying Too Heavy a Load? The Commu- nication and Miscommunication of Emotion by E-mail,” Academy of Management Review 33, no. 2 (2008): 309–27. 4A. Tenhiaelae and F. Salvador, “Looking inside Glitch Mitigation Capability: The Ef- fect of Intraorganizational Communication Channels,” Decision Sciences 45, no. 3 (2014): 437–66. 5S. Jhun, Z.-T. Bae, and S.-Y. Rhee, “Perfor- mance Change of Managers in Two Different Uses of Upward Feedback: A Longitudinal Study in Korea,” International Journal of Human Resource Management 23, no. 20 (2012): 4246–64; and J. W. Smither and A. G. Walker, “Are the Characteristics of Narrative Comments Related to Improvement in Multi- rater Feedback Ratings over Time?” Journal of Applied Psychology 89, no. 3 (June 2004): 575–81. 6P. Dvorak, “How Understanding the ‘Why’ of Decisions Matters,” The Wall Street Journal, March 19, 2007, B3. 7T. Neeley and P. Leonardi, “Effective Manag- ers Say the Same Thing Twice (or More),” Harvard Business Review, May 2011, 38–39. 8H. A. Richardson and S. G. Taylor, “Under- standing Input Events: A Model of Employees’ Responses to Requests for Their Input,” Acad- emy of Management Review 37 (2012): 471–91. 9J. S. Lublin, “Managers Need to Make Time for Face Time,” The Wall Street Journal, March 18, 2015, B6. 10E. Nichols, “Hyper-Speed Managers,” HR Magazine, April 2007, 107–10. 11R. Walker, “Declining an Assignment, with Fi- nesse,” The New York Times, August 24, 2014, 8. 12See, for example, N. B. Kurland and L. H. Pelled, “Passing the Word: Toward a Model of Gossip and Power in the Workplace,” Academy of Management Review, April 2000, 428–38; and

G. Michelson, A. van Iterson, and K. Waddington, “Gossip in Organizations: Contexts, Consequences, and Controversies,” Group and Organization Management 35, no. 4 (2010): 371–90. 13G. Van Hoye and F. Lievens, “Tapping the Grapevine: A Closer Look at Word-of-Mouth as a Recruitment Source,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 2 (2009): 341–52. 14J. K. Bosson, A. B. Johnson, K. Niederhoffer, and W. B. Swann Jr., “Interpersonal Chemis- try through Negativity: Bonding by Sharing Negative Attitudes about Others,” Personal Relationships 13 (2006): 135–50. 15T. J. Grosser, V. Lopez-Kidwell, and G. Labianca, “A Social Network Analysis of Positive and Negative Gossip in Organizational Life,” Group and Organization Management 35, no. 2 (2010): 177–212. 16R. Feintzeig, “The Boss’s Next Demand: Make Lots of Friends,” The Wall Street Journal, February 12, 2014, B1, B6. 17R. E. Silverman, “A Victory for Small Office Talkers,” The Wall Street Journal, October 28, 2014, D2. 18M. Feinberg, R. Willer, J. Stellar, and D. Keltner, “The Virtues of Gossip: Reputational Information Sharing as Prosocial Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 102 (2012): 1015–30. 19L. Dulye, “Get Out of Your Office,” HR Magazine, July 2006, 99–101. 20E. Bernstein, “How Well Are You Listen- ing?” The Wall Street Journal, January 13, 2015, D1. 21S. Shellenbarger, “Work & Family Mailbox,” The Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2014, D2. 22E. C. Ravlin, A.-K. Ward, and D. C. Thomas, “Exchanging Social Information across Cul- tural Boundaries,” Journal of Management 40, no. 5 (2014): 1437–65. 23A. Kessler, “Let’s Call off the Meeting and Get Back to Work,” The Wall Street Journal, January 2, 2015, A13. 24A. Bryant, “Getting Stuff Done: It’s a Goal, and a Rating System,” The New York Times, March 9, 2013, www.nytimes .com/2013/03/10/business/kris-duggan- of-badgeville-on-the-getting-stuff-done-index .html?pagewanted=all&_r=0. 25J. Queenan, “Fire Away!—Military Meta- phors,” The Wall Street Journal, March 28–29, 2015, C11.

26E. Bernstein, “What Verbal Tics May Be Say- ing about Us,” The Wall Street Journal, January 21, 2014, D3. 27M. Mihelich, “Bit by Bit: Stand-up Comedy as a Team-Building Exercise,” Workforce Manage- ment, February 2013, 16; and “Comedy Experi- ence,” Peppercomm, http://peppercomm .com/services/comedy-experience, accessed July 1, 2015. 28A. Bryant, “Finding, and Owning, Their Voice,” The New York Times, November 16, 2014, 6. 29T. D. Maynes and P. M. Podsakoff, “Speak- ing More Broadly: An Examination of the Nature, Antecedents, and Consequences of an Expanded Set of Employee Voice Behaviors,” Journal of Applied Psychology 99, no. 1 (2014): 87–112. 30J. Lipman, “A Guide for Men,” The Wall Street Journal, December 13–14, 2014, C1, C2. 31S. Shellenbarger, “Help! I’m on a Confer- ence Call,” The Wall Street Journal, February 26, 2014, D1, D2. 32Ibid. 33Ibid. 34S. Ovide, “Office Phone Calls Make a Comeback,” The Wall Street Journal, March 13, 2015, B6. 35P. A. Mueller and D. M. Oppenheimer, “The Pen Is Mightier Than the Keyboard: Advantages of Longhand over Laptop Note Taking,” Psychological Science 25, no. 6 (2014): 1159–68. 36N. Bilton, “Disruptions: Life’s Too Short for So Much E-mail,” The New York Times, July 8, 2012, http://bits.blogs.nytimes .com/2012/07/08/life%E2%80%99s-too- short-for-so-much-e-mail/. 37“Executive Summary,” Messagemind, 2012, www.messagemind.com. 38G. J. Mark, S. Voida, and A. V. Cardello, “‘A Pace Not Dictated by Electrons’: An Empiri- cal Study of Work without E-mail,” Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2012, 555–64. 39C. L.-L. Tan, “Mind Your E-mail Manners: No ‘XOXO’ or ‘LOL’ Allowed,” The Wall Street Journal, April 21, 2015. 40Ibid. 41E. Bernstein, “The Miscommunicators,” The Wall Street Journal, July 3, 2012, D1, D3. 42B. Roberts, “Social Media Gets Strategic,” HR Magazine, October 2012, 30–38.

378 PART 3 The Group

43“Number of Monthly Active Facebook Users Worldwide as of 1st Quarter 2015 (in Millions),” Statista/Facebook, http://www .statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of- monthly-active-facebook-users-worldwide/, accessed July 1, 2015. 44K. Wagner, “The World’s Top CEOs Are Tweeting More, Facebooking Less,” Re/Code, May 17, 2015, http://recode .net/2015/05/17/the-worlds-top-ceos-are- tweeting-more-facebooking-less/. 45Ibid. 46P. Mozur, J. Osawa, and N. Purnell, “Face- book and WhatsApp a Tough Sell in Asia,” The Wall Street Journal, February 21, 2014, B4. 47C. Smith, “By the Numbers: 125+ Amaz- ing LinkedIn Statistics,” DMR, June 6, 2015, http://expandedramblings.com/index.php/ by-the-numbers-a-few-important-linkedin- stats/. 48K. Wagner, “The World’s Top CEOs Are Tweeting More, Facebooking Less.” 49“Number of Monthly Active Twitter Users Worldwide from 1st Quarter 2010 to 1st Quarter 2015 (in Millions),” Statista/Twitter, http://www.statista.com/statistics/282087/ number-of-monthly-active-twitter-users/, accessed July 1, 2015. 50K. Wagner, “The World’s Top CEOs Are Tweeting More, Facebooking Less.” 51L. Kwoh and M. Korn, “140 Characters of Risk: CEOs on Twitter,” The Wall Street Journal, September 26, 2012, B1, B8. 52P. Mozur, J. Osawa, and N. Purnell, “Face- book and WhatsApp a Tough Sell in Asia.” 53Ibid. 54O. Allen, “6 Stats You Should Know about Business Blogging in 2015,” HubSpot Blogs, March 11, 2015, http://blog.hubspot.com/ marketing/business-blogging-in-2015. 55L. Talley and S. Temple, “How Leaders Influence Followers through the Use of Nonverbal Communication,” Leadership & Organizational Development Journal 36, no. 1 (2015): 69–80. 56C. K. Goman, “5 Body Language Tips to Increase Your Curb Appeal,” Forbes, March 4, 2013, www.forbes.com/sites/ carolkinseygoman/2013/03/14/5-body- language-tips-to-increase-your-curb-appeal/. 57A. Metallinou, A. Katsamanis, and S. Narayanan, “Tracking Continuous Emo- tional Trends of Participants During Affective Dyadic Interactions Using Body Language and Speech Information,” Image and Vision Comput- ing, February 2013, 137–52. 58J. Smith, “10 Nonverbal Cues That Convey Confidence at Work,” Forbes, March 11, 2013, www.forbes.com/sites/

jacquelynsmith/2013/03/11/10-nonverbal- cues-that-convey-confidence-at-work/. 59See L. K. Trevino, J. Webster, and E. W. Stein, “Making Connections: Complemen- tary Influences on Communication Media Choices, Attitudes, and Use,” Organization Science, March–April 2000, 163–82; and N. Kock, “The Psychobiological Model: Towards a New Theory of Computer-Mediated Com- munication Based on Darwinian Evolution,” Organization Science 15, no. 3 (May–June 2004): 327–48. 60S. Shellenbarger, “Is This How You Really Talk?” The Wall Street Journal, April 24, 2013, D1, D3. 61K Kruse, “Why Successful People Never Bring Smartphones into Meetings,” Forbes, December 26, 2013, http://www.forbes .com/sites/kevinkruse/2013/12/26/why- successful-people-never-bring-smartphones- into-meetings/. 62B. Giamanco and K. Gregoire, “Tweet Me, Friend Me, Make Me Buy,” Harvard Business Review, July–August 2012, 88–93. 63T. Lytle, “Cybersleuthing,” HR Magazine, January 2012, 55–57. 64J. Segal, “Widening Web of Social Media,” HR Magazine, June 2012, 117–18. 65“At Many Companies, Hunt for Leakers Ex- pands Arsenal of Monitoring Tactics,” The Wall Street Journal, September 11, 2006, B1, B3; and B. J. Alge, G. A. Ballinger, S. Tangirala, and J. L. Oakley, “Information Privacy in Organiza- tions: Empowering Creative and Extrarole Performance,” Journal of Applied Psychology 91, No. 1 (2006): 221–32. 66R. E. Petty and P. Briñol, “Persuasion: From Single to Multiple to Metacognitive Process- es,” Perspectives on Psychological Science 3, no. 2 (2008): 137–47; F. A. White, M. A. Charles, and J. K. Nelson, “The Role of Persuasive Arguments in Changing Affirmative Action Attitudes and Expressed Behavior in Higher Education,” Journal of Applied Psychology 93, no. 6 (2008): 1271–86. 67K. L. Blankenship and D. T. Wegener, “Opening the Mind to Close It: Consider- ing a Message in Light of Important Values Increases Message Processing and Later Resistance to Change,” Journal of Personal- ity and Social Psychology 94, no. 2 (2008): 196–213. 68See, for example, Y. H. M. See, R. E. Petty, and L. R. Fabrigar, “Affective and Cognitive Meta-Bases of Attitudes: Unique Effects of Information Interest and Persuasion,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 94, no. 6 (2008): 938–55; M. S. Key, J. E. Edlund, B. J. Sagarin, and G. Y. Bizer, “Individual

Differences in Susceptibility to Mindlessness,” Personality and Individual Differences 46, no. 3 (2009): 261–64 and M. Reinhard and M. Messner, “The Effects of Source Likeability and Need for Cognition on Advertising Effec- tiveness under Explicit Persuasion,” Journal of Consumer Behavior 8, no. 4 (2009): 179–91. 69S. Norton, “A Post-PC CEO: No Desk, No Desktop,” The Wall Street Journal, November 20, 2014, B5. 70D. Derks, D. van Duin, M. Tims, et al., “Smartphone Use and Work-Home Interfer- ence: The Moderating Role of Social Norms and Employee Work Engagement,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 88, no. 1 (2015): 155–77. 71P. Briñol, R. E. Petty, and J. Barden, “Happiness versus Sadness as a Determinant of Thought Confidence in Persuasion: A Self-Validation Analysis,” Journal of Personal- ity and Social Psychology 93, no. 5 (2007): 711–27. 72R. C. Sinclair, S. E. Moore, M. M. Mark, A. S. Soldat, and C. A. Lavis, “Incidental Moods, Source Likeability, and Persuasion: Liking Mo- tivates Message Elaboration in Happy People,” Cognition and Emotion 24, no. 6 (2010): 940–61; and V. Griskevicius, M. N. Shiota, and S. L. Neufeld, “Influence of Different Positive Emotions on Persuasion Processing: A Functional Evolutionary Approach,” Emotion 10, no. 2 (2010): 190–206. 73J. Sandberg, “The Jargon Jumble: Kids Have ‘Skeds,’ Colleagues, ‘Needs,’” The Wall Street Journal, October 24, 2006, http://online.wsj .com/article/SB116165746415401680.html. 74E. W. Morrison and F. J. Milliken, “Organi- zational Silence: A Barrier to Change and De- velopment in a Pluralistic World,” Academy of Management Review 25, no. 4 (2000): 706–25; and B. E. Ashforth and V. Anand, “The Nor- malization of Corruption in Organizations,” Research in Organizational Behavior 25 (2003): 1–52. 75F. J. Milliken, E. W. Morrison, and P. F. Hewlin, “An Exploratory Study of Employee Silence: Issues That Employees Don’t Commu- nicate Upward and Why,” Journal of Manage- ment Studies 40, no. 6 (2003): 1453–76. 76L. A. Withers, and L. L. Vernon, “To Err Is Human: Embarrassment, Attachment, and Communication Apprehension,” Personality and Individual Differences 40, no. 1 (2006): 99–110. 77See, for instance, S. K. Opt and D. A. Loffredo, “Rethinking Communication Apprehension: A Myers-Briggs Perspective,” Journal of Psychology, September 2000, 556–70; and B. D. Blume, G. F. Dreher, and T. T.

Communication CHAPTER 11 379

Baldwin, “Examining the Effects of Communi- cation Apprehension within Assessment Cen- tres,” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 83, no. 3 (2010): 663–71. 78See, for example, T. L. Rodebaugh, “I Might Look OK, but I’m Still Doubtful, Anxious, and Avoidant: The Mixed Effects of Enhanced Video Feedback on Social Anxiety Symptoms,” Behaviour Research & Therapy 42, no. 12 (De- cember 2004): 1435–51. 79K. B. Serota, T. R. Levine, and F. J. Boster, “The Prevalence of Lying in America: Three Studies of Self-Reported Lies,” Human Commu- nication Research 36, no. 1. (2010): 2–25. 80DePaulo, Kashy, Kirkendol, Wyer, and Epstein, “Lying in Everyday Life”; and C. E.

Naguin, T. R. Kurtzberg, and L. Y. Belkin, “The Finer Points of Lying Online: E-Mail versus Pen and Paper,” Journal of Applied Psy- chology 95, no. 2 (2010): 387–94. 81A. Vrij, P. A. Granhag, and S. Porter, “Pitfalls and Opportunities in Nonverbal and Verbal Lie Detection,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 11, no. 3 (2010): 89–121. 82See E. T. Hall, Beyond Culture (Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1976); W. L. Adair, “Integrative Sequences and Negotiation Outcome in Same- and Mixed- Culture Negotiations,” International Journal of Conflict Management 14, no. 3–4 (2003): 1359–92; W. L. Adair and J. M. Brett, “The Negotiation Dance: Time, Culture, and

Behavioral Sequences in Negotiation,” Organization Science 16, no. 1 (2005): 33–51; E. Giebels and P. J. Taylor, “Interaction Patterns in Crisis Negotiations: Persuasive Arguments and Cultural Differences,” Journal of Applied Psychology 94, no. 1 (2009): 5–19; and M. G. Kittler, D. Rygl, and A. Mackinnon, “Beyond Culture or Beyond Control? Reviewing the Use of Hall’s High-/Low-Context Concept,” International Journal of Cross-Cultural Manage- ment 11, no. 1 (2011): 63–82. 83M. C. Hopson, T. Hart, and G. C. Bell, “Meeting in the Middle: Fred L. Casmir’s Contributions to the Field of Intercultural Communication,” International Journal of Inter- cultural Relations, November 2012, 789–97.

S ou

rc e:

X U

K AN

G PI

N G

/F EA

TU R

EC H

IN A/

N ew

sc om

Leadership12

380

Leadership CHAPTER 12 381

The FlamboyanT leadership oF Jack ma

Entrepreneur Jack Ma, pictured here, is at the top of his game. As the leader of China’s largest online retailer and the richest man in China, Ma can afford to be a little unconventional, sometimes appear-

ing in drag and belting out “I Love You, China” to an audience

of 40,000 fans wearing devil-horned headbands and carrying

glow-sticks. He can also afford to be a strategist, motivator,

and ad hoc politician rather than a practical leader. He can even afford to know nothing about the technology that may

make him one of the industry’s richest people worldwide.

Ma had an unconventional start for an Internet billionaire.

Originally an English teacher, he had no background in comput- ers and didn’t use the Internet until 1995, when he literally

searched for “beer” in “China.” The Chinese translation ser-

vice he created shortly thereafter blossomed into the Alibaba

Group in 1999. Now, 60 percent of packages shipped through

China come from Alibaba via its websites Taobao Marketplace,

AliExpress, and Tmall.com. The Chinese postal system has

profited from the increase in shipments, as have countless manufactur-

ers of goods sold through the websites. “He effectively represents millions

of people who now depend on Alibaba for their livelihood,” Ma’s long-time

friend Duncan Clark acknowledged.

12-1 Summarize the conclusions of trait theories of leadership.

12-2 Identify the central tenets and main limitations of behavioral theories.

12-3 Contrast contingency theories of leadership.

12-4 Describe the contemporary theories of leadership and their relationship to foundational theories.

12-5 Discuss the roles of leaders in creating ethical organizations.

12-6 Describe how leaders can have a positive impact on their organizations through building trust and mentoring.

12-7 Identify the challenges to our understanding of leadership.

MyManagement If your professor has chosen to assign this, go to the Assignments section of mymanagementlab.com to complete the chapter warm up.

Learning Objectives After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

382 PART 3 The Group

More than fellow technology moguls Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook,

the late Steve Jobs of Apple, and Bill Gates of Microsoft, the success

of Ma’s leadership seems to rest on his charisma, not techno-savvy. He

uses his charm to tap into the heart of China’s growing middle class

with its penchant for spending rather than saving, hoping China will

eventually rival the United States in consumer spending. According to

McKinsey & Company, the probabilities are in his favor. Its report on China states, “The evolution of the middle class means that sophisti-

cated and seasoned shoppers—those able and willing to . . . consider

discretionary goods and not just basic necessities—will soon emerge as

the dominant force.”

Ma pictures himself as an artist and insists, “It’s not about making

money.” He freely offers sometimes oblique advice such as, “Do not

always learn from Bill Gates and Jack Ma. Learn from your neighbor.” His

charismatic messages carry a dose of poeticism, even when they are

cryptic: “My philosophy is repair the roof while there is still sunshine. If the storm is coming, don’t go up and repair the roof because you will be

destroyed.”

Fans and competitors agree, Ma is highly charismatic. Charismatic lead-

ers inspire group identity in their employees who connect with the leader’s

emotional messages and vision, which Ma epitomizes. Alibaba employee