Post for Writerpro

ilp2.pdf

Home >Human Resource Management homework help >Post for Writerpro

1r,l- ,1i i,r":i;.r,.a lL ,.r ! ',,jl. : I ,f

iri'l;t'i;li i l.",,.ii'rr",; il

Organizatlonal Behavior

li i The following pages provide the scoring keys for the self- assessments that are presented in each chapter ofthis text- book These self-assessments, as well as the self-assessments summarized in this book, can be scored automatically in the Connect Libraryl

CHAPTER 2: SCORING KEY FOR THE EXTRAVERSION-I NTROVERSION SCALE

Scoring Instrucfions: Use the table below to assign numbers

to each box you checked. For example, if you checked "Moderately Inaccurate" for statement #l ("I feel comfort' able around people"), you would asslgn a

o1" to that state- ment. After assigning nurnbers for all 10 statements, add up the numbers to estimate your extraversion-introversion personality.

Interpreting Your Score: Extraversion characterizes people who are outgoing, talkative, sociable, and assertive, It in- cludes several facets, such as friendliness, gregariousness, assertiyeness, activity level, excitement-seeking, and cheer- fulness. The opposite of extraversion is introverslon, which refers to the personality characteristics ofbeing qulet, shy, and cautious. Extraverts get their energy from the outer world (people and things around them), whereas introverts get their energy from the internal world, such as personal reflecdon on concepts and ideas, Introverts are more in- clined to dhect their interests to ideas rather than to social events.

This is the short version of the IPIP Introversion- Extraversion Scale, so it estimates overall introversion- extraversion but not specific facets within the personality dimension. Scores range from 0 to 40. Low scores indicate

484

; I ,i {'-1,

introversioni high scores indicate extraversion' The nc

in the following table are estimated from results of t adults (under 30 years old) in Scotland and undergri ate psychology students in the United States. How introversion-extraversion norms vary from one grou the next; the best norms are likely based on the entire r

you are attending or on past students in this course.

CHAPTER 3: SCORING KEY FOR THE WOI CENTRALITY SCALE

Scoring Instrucfions; Use the table below to assign num to each box you checked. For example, if you che, "Moderately Disagree" for statement #3 ("Work shoul only a srnall part of one's lifd'), you would assign a "! that statement. After assigning numbers for all 6 statem add up your scores to estimate your level ofwork centrr

7-20

0-6

Strongly Agree = 6

ModoratelyAgree = 5

Slightly Agree : 4 Slightly Disagree = 3

Moderately Disagree = 2

Strongly Disagree : 1

High extraversion

Moderate extraversion

r n;riitwCin extravlffi -n

introversion

Modorate introversion

High introversion

Strongly Agree : I ModeratelyAgree = 2

Slightly Agree : 3 Slightly Oisagree = 4

Moderately Disagree '

Strongly Disagree : 6

Interpreting Your Score: The work centrality scale r sures the extent that work is an important part of the i vidual's self-concept. People with high work centr define themselves mainly by their work roles and

Veryaccuratedescriptionof Veryaccuratedescription me:4 of me:0 Moderately accurate = 3 Moderately accurate = I Nehher accurate nor Neithsr accurate nor inaccurate = 2 inaccurate =2 Modaratelyinaccurate=l Moderatelyinaccurats=3 Veryinaccuratedescriptionof Verylnaccuratedescription me = 0 of me - 4

Organizational Behavior

Appendix B

Emotional lntelligence Sslf-Assessment llorms

Average Score

Top ltlth percentile

Top 25th percentil€

Median {50th percentile}

Bottom 25th percentile

Bottom l0th porc€ntils

14.7

r0.3

14.8

l3 il

14.5

l6 l5 t3

66fi

5t s

ii::.r;.Xi.r:f l

CHAPTER 5: SCORING KEY FOR THE PERSONAL NEEDS OUESTIONNAIRE Scoring lnstructions: Use the table at the right to assign nurnbers to each box you checked. Insert the number for each statement on the appropriate line in the scoring key below. For example, if you checked "Moderately lnaccu- ratd'for statement #1 ("I would rather be myself tlan be well thought of"), you would write a "3" on the line wlth "(1)" underneath it. After assigning numbers for all 15 statements, add up your scores to estmate your results for the two learned needs measured by this scale.

Need for achievement:

Need lor social approval:

Although everyone has the same innate driyes, our secondary or learned needs vary based on our personal- ity, values, and self-concept. This self-assessment pro- vides an estimate ofyour need strength on two learned needs; need for achievement and need for social approval.

InterpretifigYour Needfor Achievement Score: This scale, formally called "achievement strivingi' estimates the ex- tent to which you are motivated to take on and achieve challenging personal goals. This includes a desire to per- form better than others and to reach one's potential. The scale ranges from 0 to 28. How high or low is your need for achievement? The ideal would be to compare your score with the collective results of other students in your class. Otherwise, the table at the right offers a rough set of norms with which you can compare your score on this scale,

l2l {3) {6} {7) (s) (12} {t4} 9*1f*A*$*9*J- *L*k=- tl) (4) t5) {8} {ro) tlr} fi3} {15)

Very accurats description ofme=4 Moderately accurate = 3

Neither accurate nor inaccurats : 2 Moderately inaccurate = 1

Very inaccurate description olme=0

Very accurate descri6ix . of me = 0

Moderatelyaccurate=1 il.t- i.'ri Neither accurate nor inaccurate - 2

olme = 4

_ .iir.,rl Moderately inaccurae = t .'!t,. Very inaccurate UescriFk; "ii

ffi- -i-.:-;li],ilii-

l\o)h

h{Tu10

flt ffi,t,.. ry

-!+

drr${*

High need tor achievemsnt

Above average need for achievement

Average need lor achievemest

Below average need for achievement

Low need fsr achievement

lnterpreting Your Need for Social Appraval Scorer The seed for social approval scale estimates the extent to whicL w

.'i : iil,l

li'!l r!1..

fri. 6:11,

Organizational Behavior

Appendix B

CHAPTER 7: SCORING KEY FOR THE CRE.ATIVE PERSONAUTY SCALE

Scoringlnstrucfiorsr Assign a positive point (* l) after each of the following words that you checked off in the self-assessment:

Capable

Encourager

Gatekeeper

Harmonizsr

lnitiator

Summarizer

Team f,ole Prelerence Definitions and ltlorms

Encourager: People who score high on High: 12 and this dimension hava a strong tondency above to praise and support the ideas of other Medium: g t0 :13 team members,therebyshowing

Low: g and beir warmth and solidarity with the group'

Gatekeeper: People rvtro score high on Highl 12 and this dimension have a strong tendency above to encourage all tsam members to Medium: 9 to ti participate in the disoussion.

Low: g and bs*

Harmonizer: People who score high on High: Il and this dimension have a strong tendency above to mediate intragroup conflicts and Medium: 9 u *& reduce tension,

Low: g and benc

-_.* Clever -- Confident

Egotistical

Humorous

Individualistic

lnformal

Insightfrrl

__- lntelligent

Affected

Cautious

Commonplace

Conservative

Conventional

Dissatisfied

Inventive

Origtnal

Reflective

Resourceful

Self-confident

sery Snobbish

Unconventional

I{ide interests

Honest

Manoedy

Narow interests Sincere

Submissive

Suspicious

(1) /,1

{21

Interpreting Your Score: The {ive team roles measurd b are based on scholarship over the years. The followiryt'&rlr defines these five roles and Presents the range of scqsfu high, medium, and low lwels of each role. These norw ni based on results from a sample of MBA students.Assign a negative point (-1) after each of the following

words that you checked offin the self-assessment:

f-t F*,C ,il* ! (.-

,:- ,#, ,.I [i': *,ti- $,r &::, s;

t::

r:,

#*. li*- :r'rir.' r.. 'li{gr. 4

Next, sum the positive and negative points' Interpreting Your Scote: This instrumert estimates your creative potential as a personal characteristic. The scale recognizes that creative people are intelligent and persis- tent and possess an inventive thinking style. Creative personality varies somewhat from one occuPational group to the next. The table below provides norms based

on undergraduate and graduate uaiversity/college students.

CHAPTER 8: SCORING KEY FOR THE TE.AM ROLES PREFERENCE SCALE

Scoring Instrucfions: Write the scores circled for each item on the appropriate line in the scoring key at the top ofthe right column (statement numbers are in parentheses), and add up each scale.

lnitiftu: People who score high on this dimension have a suong tondencyto identify goals lor thb meeting, including

ways to work on thoso goals.

Surmrizsr: People who score high on tlris dimension hav6 a strong tendoncy

to kosp track of whatwas said in the meeting (i.e., act as the team's memory).

High: 12 and

abovs

Msdium: 9 te l: Low:8 and bs@*

High: 10 and try* Medium: 8 tc 3

Low:7 and b*

CHAPTER 9: SCORING KFf FOR THE ACIfi t LISTENING SKILLS INVENTORY

Scoring Instrucfions: Use the fust table below to sco:e &r response you marked for each statement. Then, ls riu scoring key, wite that score on the line correspond:ry.'k

2 l11l

E {12} i,

(141

(15)

Above *9 You have a high croative personality +1 to +9 You have an aversgo creative

personalitY

B€low +1 You have a low creative personality

Interpreting your $core: The three active listening dimen_ sions are deffned as follows:

. l-:T*g,

Sensing is the process of receiving signals rrom the sender and pafing attention to tt-e*I.e..tirr"

Aetive Listeaing ltlorms

Appendix B

the staternent number (statemcnt numbers are in paren_ l5::l*9 dd up each subscar.. F;r;;;r*;;, dl*.areroom' ror statement #l ("I keq g op.n mind . . .,,), fouwonld write a "2" on the line ;ith .;Aj;; ,"i.r"rJif, i,.Calculate the overall Active Listeningir*r,*y..*. Uysumming all subscales.

489

listeners improve sensing in three ways. Theypostpone .evalytign by not forming an opinion

"ntif tire speaker

has finished, avoid interriptiof tir",p".i..rr. .**r*u_ tion, and remain morivatea to ["., i",fr..i".t r.. Evaluating: This dimension of active listeniig includes understanding the message meaning, evaluatine the message, and remembering the mesiage. To imirove their evaluation ofthe conversation, active listeners empathize with the speaker_th"y t y t"

"na.rrt*aano De sensitive to the speaker,s feelings, thoughts, and situation. Evaluation also improves Uyirg;ir?;; th. speakcr's ideas during the communicati; 6;;... }op""di"Cj Responding the third dimension of active listening is feedback to tf,e sender, *fr"f, *"o".i., *adirects the speaker,s communicatio", e.Uu. ii*t*.r, show interest through nonverbal cu., l.y.ontLinoa_ ding, symbiotic facial expression) *d iV.uoairrs b".t channel signals (e.g., . t sie,). rr,.y ar" iffi'.t*_ sage such as by summarizing o. ,.pfrrr.iogii. ,r".t*t ideas at appropriate breaks Ci" yir. ,"ytijri.i. . . r,l. Scores on the three Active Listening dimensions rangcfrom 4 to 20. The overall score ranges from 12 to 60. Normsvaryfrom one group to the next. ri. r"u"*t"g;;#;"*,

:^".:T: f:* a.sampte of 80 MBA students in ,ir.ornoi", \Ausualla and Singapore). For example, the top l0th per_centile for sensing is 17, indicatid il-t;;;r".*, ofpeople score 17 or above and ro percini.."r. uI"*I, *this dimension. Keep in

'nina tfrurii.r; r;;;;:il**

self-perceptions. Evjuations from others (such as tirougl, 360-degree feedback) may provide . *oi" u..*ui"

"rti_mate of your active listening-on one or more dimensions, l1l.-d*ty the responding-dimension, ;;l;;;;;br. *others.

CHAPTER 10; SCORTNG KEy FOR THE COWORKER INFLUENCE iCAIE Scoring Instructions: To calculate your scores on theCoworker Influence Scale, write tt

" nu*b.. .i..iJ fo.each statement on the apor

b"r;; i;";; ffi;ll,',I,:',i:: i'ffilJ[:;::'tr Hup each scale.

Interprcting your score: Influence refers to any behavior thatattempts to alter someone's attitudes o, U.ir"rior. if,J-.. rr.several tlpes of influence, including tfr. .W r"."r*.a Uythis instrument. This instrument assesses your preference for using each type ofinfluence oncr***, liJ

"ii.rl."pr..ta similar level as your position rn tne organization. . Persuaslon: persuasion refers to uslng logical and emo-tional appeals to change others' .ttit"[.r.?f,i.l. i"" .f

Rarely/nsyer = 5 Seldom = 4 Sometimes:3

0ften = 2

Rarely/ngysy = 1 Seldom = 2 Sometimes = 3 0ften = 4

Almost always = I Almost always = S

,I !*t (/l (ro) " +::' * I * l -tzt g) ts) {11)Responding Z* 5_ + _4)+ lo {31 (6} (e} tlil,

Active listening Add up all dimensiontotal scotes =

Organlzational Behavior

Appendix B

Informedon ConEol: Information control is$do explicitly manipulating others access to inlorm* - ;;i,il;;*po'. of changing their altitud:: *l Tio havior. it includes screening out information-ry$ oppose your Preference and embellishing

irii i"r"l*.ti,"a that supp-orts Yfut pts*

i]:l4ii:1: i.,ry

r$&*^i!"+i,,+. . {*t-r

when a group of people with common- interesss ' ,!t U*a toi.ttt"t toinfluence others' It also exists r*1;1Lrilllg LUS9urEr o"r..r,ion, such as when you convince somem fu i;il:r*.i ;;;i;*. on You' side and suPPst * position.

lli*ura app"ah Upward appeal occurs-whec t* ,-.'ty on .rp'pott from peopie higher.up tU3 of tionat hierarchy. This support may be real

(seac

management shows support) or logically arpcd

1y"" .'*pf"i" ftow youiposition is consistent 4.,,... company policY). ' i"gr",i"j,i"", Ingratiation-is a special case ?f

ra5 sion management in which you attempt to r

perception-of liking or similarity to another

it "

t ope that he or she will become more suPPililrl

;;;'i;;ilil s: :,*'Y, b*"i-c !:1 ii;;;,h ih" ;"rnorli." helping the coworker r'r'i expectation of reciprocity), slovr}s suPP:rt Trf -

to"on. sorv.y' more than half of employees

coworkers engage inthis tactic'

Coalition Formationr Codition formation occlw

."ir*t tt ideas, and asking for the coworkerl are all examPles of ingratiation'

ence tactics.

Scores on the eight Coworker Influence Scalc

sions ,*g. from 31o 15' Highet scores indicdc person has a higher preference for and use of th* i", ,o.ti.. Nonris vary from one ErouP to ft: "T- iowing t"Ut" shows norms from a sample o{

E studeits tn t\ryo countries (Australia and Singryd

example, the top lOth percentile for assertiveossssxr

il"i ii", I0 percent of people score 9 :: ry1 So pe"rcent score below 9 on this dimension'

Ketq

that these scoles rePresent self-perception-s' f ir-o* ott.tt (such ai through 360-degree feedb*#! provide a more accurate estimate of your pretcrc*r

- .i:,,, ,..,11

.es,J}stt''r x !tsXrri l:.:,1 . .

"j;ry.

\'4

#rP .'iimr:')l $ii*ir&

the most widely used influence strategies toward others

in any position (e'g., coworkers, bosses' subordinates)'

$ilent iuthotity: The silent application ofauthority occurs when someone complies with a request because

her or she is awate of the requester's legitimate or

6.tt po*.t this influence tactic is very subtle' such as making the target p€rson aware of the status

exPertlse of the person making the request' , - , Exchange Etchange involves the promise of bene{its

oi..toti..tt in exc[ange for the target persorft compli- ance with your request. This tactic also includes

re-

;;dd tir. targei of past benefits or favors' with the expectaiion thaithe target will now make up for

that

delt. Negotiation is also part ofthe exchange strategy'

. Asserdveness: Assertiveness involves actively applying legitimate and coercive power to in{luence others'

This

taitic includes demanding that the other person com-

nlv with vour wishes, showing frustration or imPa-

iiJ".u rniitt ttt other person, and using threats of sanctions to force comPliance'

Persuasion

Silent AuthoritY

Exchange

Asgertiveness

lnlormation Control

;;-+j{- +-J-= ti-

g-.t .g-= il (21 (lql (18) **4+\:(31 (11) (lel 4+4+ I -(4) l{21 (2ol L a, '),__+_+ '+.g= (5t {13} (2r}

\\rl

; b

iCoalition | ']i 4Formation

- + +

{6} {1$} lpl unwardApoeal I + t +-J-:' (7r fi51 l?3I lnoratiation 9- * j- +:y' =" (sl (16) (241

!::]

i;:

Average Score

Top 10th Percentile Top 25th Percentile Median {50th Percentile)

Bottom 25th Percentilo Bottom loth percentile

12.8

t5 l4 13

10,0

I 7

7.3

I 6

,,,,ffi' Organizational Behavior: Emerging Knowledge'

Global Reality' Sixth Edition ti*i

CHAPTER 11: SCORING KEY ioCrne coNFLlcr HANDLING scALE Scarins Instruc-tiors: To estimate your preferred conflict

han-

ait g ityt.t, use the first table below to score the response

uoukufu"a for each statement' Then, in the scoring key

febw, wite that score on the line corresponding to the state-

ment number (statement numbers are in pareltheses) and

Ji tp..a *iscale. For example {f1u ctryked "Seldom' for stitement #1 ("I $'ent along with the others ' '

"')' you

would write a "2" on the line with "(1)" underneath it'

. Yielding: Yielding involves giving in compl*"tyP,. the othJr side's wihes, or at least cooperating with little

or no attention to your own hterests' This style involves

making unilatcral concessions, unconditional Promlses'

*a "fi.it"S

lt+ with no expectationof reciprocalAelp' . CompromGhg: Compromising involves looking for a

p"-i i* f" *fti"h yo* lott"t ari offset by equally val- ued gains It involves matching the other party's con-

..t*iont, adong conditional promises or threats' and

actively searching for a middle ground between the in-

terests ofthe two Parties. . .lrrofaiogt Avoiding trles to smooth over or avoid con-

flict situltions altogether' It represents a low concern

iJit"tfr..ff *a thi" other party' In other words' avoid- ers tryto suppress thinking about th" conflict'

. Fordng: Foriing tries to *ltt tttt conflict at the other's .r,p.ttti. It it .lod.s "hard' influence tactics' particu-

larlv assertiveness, to get one's own way'

. Problem Solving: Problem solving tries to find a mu- tually beneficial solution for both parties' Information

sharing is an important feature of this style' because

iotft p""tti., need to identify common gt:yg 3d potential solu$ons that satisSboth (or all) of them'

Scores on the five Conflict Handting Scale dimensions

rarrse from 4 to 20' Higher scores indicate that the person has

"iinfr.t r..f"t nce for-and use ofthat particular confligt han-

drd"/. Norms vary frorn one group to the-n3!' The fol- to*iig iOL tlrorot norms from a sample of 70 MBA students

io t ui.o*tti.s (Australia and Singapore)' For example' the top t0th percentile for yielding is 14, indicating that

^10

per-

."nt ofp.opl" s.ot" 14 or abovi and 90 percent score bdow 14

* *ri. A*.o.ion. Keep in mind that these scores represent r"ff-p.rc"p$ons. Evatuaions from others

(such as through 360-

aeeree feeaUack) may provide a more accurate estimate of

yoiu preferred conflia handling style'

Yielding

Compromising

Forcing

Problem solving

Avoiding

Appendix B

+r+ (1) (71 (lql A*lL +-L+ 12.! [9] (x]i! + ? +4+g ltl t&t

-*-+-l-* .'*

(31 {9} (13} -3**!L*J-* t4) (6) {14}

(20) n 7- (l i) t-\-7- - fl51.): (l 8) f^

{1S}

Interoreting.Your Score; This instrument measures your pref-

.r.ni. fot -*a

*e of the five conflict handling dimensions:

Conllict Handling Scale l{orms

Average Score

lop ltlth Percsntile Top 25th Percentile Median (S{hh Percentile}

Bottom 25th Percentil8 Bottom l0th Percentile

6.8

l0 I 7

7.4

l0 I 8' 6

8.1

8.g 6

8.9

12. t0 7

Rarely/never: 1

Seldom = 2 Sometimes = 3

Often = 4 Almost alwaYs = 5

Average Score

Top lOth Percentile

Top 25th Percentile

Medlan (50th Percentile)

Bottom 25th Percentile

Bottom loth Percentile

11.0 |

ll 10

13.E

l4 12

10.2

12. t0 I 6

13.5

1?t 15

15.9

l8 15

13t

Organizational Behavior

Appendix B

CHAPTER 12: SCORING KEY FOR THE ROMANCE OF LEADER5HIP SCALE Scoring Instructians: Use the table below to score the re- sponse you marked for each statement. Then, add up the scores to calculate your Romance ofLeadership score. For example, if you marked "Disagee" for statement #l (',Even in an econornic . . ."), you would write a "2" on the line with "(1)" underneath it.

CHAPTER 13: SCORING KEY FOR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE PREFERENCE SCALE Scoring Instructlons: Use the tablc below to assign nu:lirer to each response you marked. Insert the number for er* statement on the appropriate line in the scoring ke5 Fx example, ifyou checked "Not at all" for item #1 ('h pel:a& career ladder . . ."), you would write a "0" on the line xeL "(l)" underneath it. After assigning numbers for all 15 srd.* ments, add up the scores to estimate your degree of preia- ence for a tall hierarchy, formalization, 6d 6sn11nliz:aaa Then calculate the overall score bysumming all scales.

l:. \-.1.'

i, ;. i:::'

iqi !';l &!n1

Bt. g:i:l

Fli fl {:. 4i' Yi:

iir.

ir ir

Not at all : 3 A little = 2 Somewhat = I Very much = 0

Tall Hierarchy (Hl

Formalization

{F}

Centralization (c)

Total score

{Mschanistic}

Not at all : 0 Alittle: I Somewhat = 2 Very much = 3

Total score: b-*L*4 tlt (?t 'la)

. &r l+ L,* G** d-- o)

+/+ (4)

*?* (91'

l\-i A\rb'{'q.,. , .

N. 1i,((.,i ') t '

c) ,+ r [5) "7

{1 0l

* SL b

Interpreting Your Score: Romance of leadership is a phe- nomenon in which followers (and possibly other stake- holders) want to belicve that leaders make a difference in the organization's success. People with a high romance of leadership score attribute the causes of organizational events much more to its leaders and much less to the econ- omy, compeUtion, and other factors beyond the leader's short-term control. This scale ranges from l0 to 50, with higber scores indicating that the person has a higher ro- mance of leadership. The following norms are derived from a large sample ofEuropean employees with an average age in their mid-30s and work experlence averaging about 15 years, However, tlrese norms should be viewed with cau- tion, because the romance ofleadership scale is a recert development and norms for any instrument can vary from one group to the next.

lzt (sl (8) {fi} {13) ffi ; Ir t ? ', () .:'J - | --l---l--r- {3) (5} {7} (e} (14) $

Add up all dimension scores

{H+F+c}=

Int*preting Your Score: The three organizational stn&.Esr dimensions and the overall score are defined belor-, xqruG with the range of scores for high, medium, and lowlema&,Ei each dimension based on a sample of MBA students.

0rganizational Structure Prelerence $ubscale Delinitions and ilorms

Iall hlererchp People with high scores on this dimension prefer to work in orga- nizations with several levels of hierar. chy and a narrow span of control (Iew employees per supervisor).

High: l1 to I5

Medium: 5 m 16

Low: Below 6

Stronglydisagree= 5 Stronglydisagree = I Disagree=4 Disagree=2 Neutral=3 Neutral:3 AgreE=z Agres=4 Strongly agree = I Strongly agree = E

3&.50 Above average romance of leadership 27-37 Average romance olleadership 10-26 Balow average romonce of leadership

(corl@

SCtfr

Urganlzallolldl eEr raYru''.

Appendix B

Goroorato Gulturs Prolerence Subscale

Definitiont and l{orms

Gontol Gultrc This culture values the

rote of senior executivos to lead the or'

oanization. lts goal is to keep everyone

lligned and under control'

Perlormance Gulturc: This cutture val-

,"r-inJiriOrrf and organizational perfor-

;;;;;;tl suivos for efioctiveness and efficiencY.

Relationship Gulture: This culture val'

;;;-;r'turi;s and well-being' lt consid- ers ooen communication, fairness'

iii*irr*, and sharing a vital Part ot organizational life'

Bosoonsiue Gulture: This culture values

its .'uility to kt.p in tune with the exter

nal environment, including being c0m'

Highr 3 to I Medium:1 to 2

Low:0

High: 5 to 6

Medium: 3 to 4

Low:0 to 2

High:6

Medium: 4to 5

Low:0 to 3

Highr 6

Mediuml 4 to 5

Low:0 to 3

p*iiir. .nO realizing new opportunitiss'

fomalizationl People with high scores

on ittit Oir.ntion prefer to work in orga'

niirtiont *rtrt. io'bs are clearly defined with limited discretion'

Gentraliration: People with high scores

on tt it Oimrntion prefer to work in orga-

nizations where decision making occurs

mainlv among top management rather

it'.n iptt.A iutto lower'level staff'

Iotal Scop (iiochanistic): People with

triotl stor.t on tttis dimension prefer

io worr in mechanistic organizations'

*tttit.t ttto.t *ith low scores preler io wo* in otganic organizational struc-

irr.s. ftlectrinistic structures are char-

,.t.tiarO bY a narrow span of control

,nJhigh otgr.t of lormalization and

..ntirii..tion. 0rganic structures have

u *iO, .pun of tontrol, little formaliza-

High:12to 15

Medium: I to 1l

Low: Below 9

High:10t0 l5

Medium:7 to 9

Low: BelowT

High: 30 to 45

Medium:22to 29

Low: Below 22

tion, *iJ..rn ralized decision making'

CHAPTER 14: SCORING KEY FOR T-HE

- - ,;ffi bi,lii' Cu urune PREFERENcE scALE Scoringlnstrucfio',s: On each

line below w*! in a'1" if

vou circled the statement *d o "O" if you did not' Then

laa "p,t "

scores for each subscale'

CHAPTER 15: SCORING KEY

Fiiniirr ToLERANcE oF CHANGE SCALE

Scortng Insttuctions: Use the table below to assign num-

bers to each box you checked' For example',.if you

il.*.d;vr"a"t",+ disagree" forstatement #1 ("1 gen-

eraltv-prefer the unexpected ' ' "')'

' ) - ) ,"" ilrfa write a "2" beside that.-/ statement' After assigning numbers(lz.al ' for all 10 statements, add uP your

(sbl change.|" (l2b)

i _ -i (11a)

Control Cultute

Performance Cuhure

RelationshiP Culture

Responsive Culture

.1 ,\t] \-l.!-+- (6bl (8b) j-*I (sbl {6a} I*a (4bl (8a) J-*I (7b) {ea)

il {) --:l- + .- {?1! (5"?l i-j + '-)

{1b) (3b}rt\ +-+- (1al {3al l*+J (2b) laal

4 -lJ- (l_lb)

+- (7al

l +...lL

(10b)

+L (10a)

lnterpretingYour Score: These corporate cultures Tly

ffi;i'ffid organizations' but tiiey represent only four

.#il; ;;ti,tle-organizational

culiures' Also' keep in

mind that none of these tJto'u* i' iot'urently good or bad'

il;;;ff";G in different situations' The foyr corPorate ;ffi;t-;Jni.aio *" ioure at the top of the right

col-

umn, along with tt" tu"gt oi ttores for higtr' medium' anil

low levels of each dimension based on a sample of MBA

students.

StronglY Agree = 7

Moderatsly Agree = 6

SlightlY Agrss = 5

Neutral = 4

Slightly Disagrso = 3

Moderatsly Disagree = 2

Strongly Disagree = I

Strongly Agree = 1

ModeratelYAgree:2 Slightly Agreg : 3 Neutral = 4

SlightlY Disagree = 5

ModeratetY Disagres = 6

StronglY Disagree = 7

Organizatlonal Behavior

Appendir B

InterpretlngYour Score: This instrument is formally known as the "tolerance ofambiguity" scale The original scalc, de- veloped 50 years ago, has since been revised and adapted. The instrument presentd here is an adaptation ofthese re- vised irrstruments. People with a high tolerance for ambigu- ity are comfortable with uncertainty and new situations. Ihese are characteristics ofthe hyperfast changes occurring in many organizations today. This lnstrument ranges from l0 to 70, wtth higher scores indicating a higher tolerance for change (i.e,, higher tolerance for ambiguity). The table at the right indicates the raoge of scores for high, medium, and low tolerance for change. These nonns are estimates from recent studies using some or all ofthese items,

You seom to have a high toleranco

change.

You seem to have a moderate leve tolerance for change.

You seem to have a low degree of ance for change. lnstead, you prel stable work environments.