Curriculum
- 23 Sections
- 23 Lessons
- Lifetime
- 1 - Introduction to Organizational Behaviour2
- 2 – Perception and Individual Decision Making2
- 3 - Personality2
- 4 - Attitudes2
- 5 - Motivation2
- 6 - Group2
- 7 – Stress2
- 8 – Team2
- 9 – Organization Structure and Design2
- 10 - Leadership2
- 11 - Conflict Management2
- 12 - Organizational Change2
- 13 - Organizational Development2
- 14 - Power, Politics, Ethics in OD2
- 15 - Diagnostic, Action and Process2
- 16 - Components of OD – Operational and Maintenance2
- 17 - OD Intervention2
- 18 – Comprehensive Intervention2
- 19 – Structural Intervention2
- 20 – Implementation and Assessment of OD2
- 21 – Issues in Consultant – Client Relations2
- 22 – Mechanistic and Organic Systems2
- 23 – Future Trends in Organization Development2
2 – Perception and Individual Decision Making
Introduction
Perception is how people organise and interpret their sensory experiences to make sense of their surroundings. However, what one perceives may differ significantly from actual reality. It does not have to be, but there is frequently disagreement. For example, for example All employees in a firm may have a great place to work, favourable working conditions, interesting job assignments, good pay, and understanding and responsible management, but, as most of us know, it is scarce to find such a workplace. People’s behaviour is based on their perspective of reality, not reality itself, which is why perception is crucial in studying OB.
2.1 Nature and Importance
Perception is how people organise and interpret their surroundings based on sensory experiences. Perceptions are crucial to research in Organizational Behaviour since people’s behaviour is based on their impression of reality rather than reality itself. Many things influence perception. These elements can be found in the perceiver, the perceived item, or the setting in which perception is made. Attitude, personality, reasons, interest, experience, and expectations are all personal characteristics that influence perception. Because our inferences are based on people’s behaviours, our view of humans differs from our vision of inanimate objects such as desks, machines, etc. Because people have ideas, objectives, or intentions, our assumptions about a person’s interior state substantially influence our perceptions and judgments.
2.2 Factors Influencing Perception
Many factors affect perception, the process of interpreting and making sense of sensory information. Understanding these factors is crucial for comprehending why individuals perceive the same stimuli differently. Here is a detailed exploration of the key factors shaping perception:
1. Perceiver’s Attitudes: Personal attitudes, encompassing beliefs, values, and past experiences, are pivotal in shaping how individuals perceive stimuli. For instance, a person with a robust environmental sustainability ethos might view a company’s efforts more positively than someone with different values.
2. Target Characteristics: The attributes of the object or person being perceived significantly impact how it is interpreted. For instance, a job candidate’s attire can influence perceptions during an interview, with well-dressed candidates often perceived as more competent.
3. Situational Context: The context or environment in which perception occurs is crucial. What might be acceptable behaviour or stimuli in one situation may be inappropriate in another. For instance, humour suitable among friends may not be ideal in a formal business meeting.
4. Attention: The level of attention individuals allocate to specific stimuli affects their perception. In a crowded environment, stimuli that stand out or capture attention are more likely to be noticed.
5. Motivation: Personal motivations and needs influence the attention given to specific stimuli. For instance, a hungry person is likelier to notice and respond to food-related advertisements.
6. Experience: Past experiences significantly shape how individuals interpret new information. Positive or negative encounters with a brand, product, or situation can influence perceptions.
7. Cultural Differences: Cultural background plays a substantial role in influencing perceptions. Different cultures may interpret the same stimuli differently due to variations in values, norms, and expectations.
8. Expectations: Preconceived notions and expectations contribute to interpreting incoming information. Individuals anticipating a particular outcome are more likely to perceive stimuli that match those expectations.
9. Social Context: The presence and actions of others in a social setting can influence individual perceptions. Social norms, peer pressure, and collective opinions shape how individuals interpret stimuli.
10. Emotional State: Emotional states, such as happiness, sadness, or stress, can impact perception. Individuals in different emotional states may interpret the same stimuli in contrasting ways.
In conclusion, these factors collectively contribute to the subjectivity inherent in the perceptual process, highlighting the intricate nature of how individuals make sense of the world around them.
2.3 Attribution Theory
Our perception of people varies compared to inanimate objects like desks, machines, or buildings. This distinction is due to our ability to make inferences about people’s actions, which we don’t apply to inanimate objects. While non-living objects follow the laws of nature, they lack beliefs, motives, and intentions.
In contrast, people possess internal states, beliefs, and intentions, influencing our attempt to explain why they behave in specific ways. Attribution theory delves into how we judge individuals differently based on the meaning attributed to their behaviour. Three key factors determine this attribution:
1. Distinctiveness: Distinctiveness examines whether an individual exhibits different behaviour in varying situations. If someone is late for work, distinctiveness assesses whether this behaviour is usual or unusual. If the behaviour is unusual, an external attribution (attributing it to the situation) is likely; if it’s typical, an internal attribution (attributing it to the person) is probable.
2. Consensus: Consensus refers to how everyone facing similar situations responds. If consensus is high, indicating that others respond similarly, an external attribution is more likely. If the behaviour is specific to the individual, the observer may attribute it internally.
3. Consistency: Consistency focuses on whether a person responds the same way over time. If the behaviour is consistent and occurs regularly, the observer is inclined to attribute it internally. Inconsistency might lead to external attribution.
The accompanying diagram illustrates the attribution theory, emphasizing these three factors. Interestingly, biases exist in attribution, such as the fundamental attribution error, where external factors are underestimated when judging others’ behaviour. Additionally, the self-serving bias involves attributing personal successes to internal factors and failures to external factors.
For instance, individuals might attribute their colleague’s tardiness (behaviour) to internal factors like partying late if it’s unusual (distinctiveness), other colleagues following the same route but arriving on time (low consensus), and the colleague being consistently late (high consistency).
While insightful, the attribution theory is not universally free from biases, as cultural differences may influence attributions. When observing behaviour, this theory underscores that individuals aim to distinguish between internally and externally caused actions, subject to potential errors or biases.
2.4 Frequently Used Shortcuts In Judging Others
When we judge other people, we often judge them quickly. It is hard to understand what other people do. Because of this, people devise ways to make the job easier to handle. These methods are often helpful because they help us quickly form accurate impressions and give us accurate information for making guesses. That being said, they are not perfect. They get us into trouble, and they do. Here are some of these shortcuts:
i. Selective perception
Any trait that makes a person, thing, or event stand out will make it more likely to be noticed. Why? For the simple reason that we can’t take in everything we see. Some things can only be taken in. We selectively perceive stuff because we can’t see everything around us. The way a group sees the things that an organisation does is changed to fit with the group’s goals. But how does being selective help you judge other people faster? We take bits and pieces because we can’t fully understand everything we see. But those bits and pieces aren’t picked randomly; they are picked based on our attitudes, interests, and past experiences. We can “speed-read” other people with selective vision, but we might get the wrong idea about them. We can jump to incorrect conclusions from situations that aren’t clear-cut because we see what we want to see. If there is a rumour going around the office that your company’s sales are down and that significant layoffs may be coming, a routine visit from a Senior Executive from Headquarters could be seen as the first step in management’s search for people to fire, even though that may not be at all what the Senior Executive is thinking.
ii. Halo effect
The “halo effect” happens when we form an opinion about someone based on just one trait, like how smart, friendly, or attractive they are.
One example is when students rate their teacher by focusing on a single trait, like how enthusiastic they are, and letting that one trait affect how they rate the teacher as a whole. A teacher could be calm, sure of himself, very informed, and highly qualified, but if his teaching style lacks passion, those students would likely give him a low grade.
A famous study proved the existence of the halo effect. People were given a list of traits, such as intelligence, skill, practicality, hard work, determination, and warmth, and asked to rate the person with those traits. When these traits were used, people thought the person was intelligent, funny, well-liked, and creative. You get a new set of views if you change the list so that cold is used instead of warm. It was clear that the people being tested let one trait affect how they thought about the person. There’s no chance that the halo mentioned tends to work. According to research, it is most likely to be extreme when the traits that need to be seen aren’t apparent regarding action. When the trials have moral undertones, the person seeing them is rating traits they haven’t had much experience with.
iii. Contrast effects
We don’t judge a person by themselves. How we feel about others we’ve recently met impacts our feelings about one person. An example of how contrast effects work is when you go to an interview and see many people applying for the job. Because of where a candidate is in the interview plan, it can change how they are judged. If other strong applicants are before the individual, they are likelier to get a good review.
iv. Projection
If we think other people are like us, it’s easy to judge them. For instance, if you want challenge and duty at work, you think everyone else does too. Or, if you’re honest and trustworthy, you believe that everyone else is too. It is expected to see yourself in other people’s eyes, known as projection. This can change how you think about other people.
When someone projects onto others, they see them based on how they are, not how the other person is. When looking at people who are actually like them, these observers are very correct. It’s not that they are smart, but because they always think that people are like them. That’s why they are right when they finally find someone like them. When managers project, they make it harder for them to deal with differences between people. They often think that everyone is the same when that’s not true.
v. Stereotyping
We use a shortcut called stereotypes when we judge someone based on how they think they fit into their group. There are, of course, some good things about generalisation. It makes things easier to understand in a complicated world and helps us stay consistent. When we have too many things to deal with, it’s easier if we use stereotypes. People often say things in groups that are based on stereotypes about gender, age, race, culture, and even weight. From the point of view of perception, people will see these images, whether they are true or not, if they expect to see them. One problem with stereotypes is that they are common, even if they aren’t accurate or have nothing to do with the situation. If they are common, it could mean many people have the same wrong idea about a group based on a false premise.
2.5 Specific Applications In Organization
People in organizations are constantly making judgements about each other. Managers have to assess how well their employees are doing their jobs. We also evaluate the effort our colleagues put into their work. When a new person joins a work team, the existing members quickly form opinions about them. These judgements can have important consequences for the organization.
1. Employment Interview
The employment interview plays a significant role in deciding who gets hired and who doesn’t in any organization. Most people are hired after going through an interview. However, research shows that interviewers often make inaccurate judgements, and there is often poor agreement among interviewers. Impressions formed early in the interview tend to stick, and negative information disclosed early carries more weight. Decisions change very little after the first few minutes of the interview. Since interviews lack consistent structure and interviewers have different expectations, judgements about the same candidate can vary widely. This means that perceptual factors strongly influence hiring decisions and, consequently, the quality of an organization’s workforce.
2. Performance Expectations
People tend to validate their perceptions of reality, even if those perceptions are incorrect. This tendency is crucial when considering performance expectations on the job. The terms “Self-Perception Fulfilling Prophecy” and “Pygmalion Effect” describe the phenomenon where people’s expectations influence their behaviour. If a manager expects high performance, employees will likely meet those expectations, and vice versa. This creates a situation where expectations become reality.
3. Performance Evaluation
The perceptual process has a significant impact on an employee’s performance appraisal. The appraisal, which affects promotions, pay raises, and job continuation, assesses an employee’s work. While some appraisals can be objective, many jobs are evaluated subjectively. Subjective measures, being judgmental, depend on the evaluator’s impression of the employee’s work, influencing the outcome significantly.
4. Employee Effort
In many organizations, an individual’s future is not solely based on performance but also on their level of effort. Assessing an individual’s effort is subjective and susceptible to perceptual distortions and bias. Appraisals of an employee’s effort can majorly impact their future within the organization.
5. Employee Loyalty
Managers often judge whether employees are loyal to the organization. Despite a general decline in employee loyalty, openly criticising the firm or looking for opportunities elsewhere may be considered disloyal. Organizations may cut off advancement opportunities for employees perceived as disloyal, making loyalty assessments highly subjective. Different decision-makers may perceive loyalty differently, adding complexity to the judgement of an employee’s commitment. For instance, some people might view questioning a top management decision as being unfaithful, while others might see it as a sign of concern and care. Even if an employee acts out of loyalty to the company, management may view it as disloyalty.
2.6 The Link Between Perception And Individual Decision Making
Individuals within organizations are constantly faced with decisions, making choices between multiple alternatives. This responsibility is not limited to managers; non-managerial employees also make decisions impacting their jobs and organizations. Many organizations empower non-managerial staff with decision-making authority previously reserved for managers. Therefore, individual decision-making is crucial to Organizational Behavior (OB). Individuals’ perceptions greatly impact the quality of decisions and the decision-making process.
Decision-making is typically a response to a problem, reflecting a discrepancy between the current state of affairs and a desired state, necessitating consideration of alternative courses of action. The perception of whether a problem exists is subjective, varying between individuals. Additionally, interpreting and evaluating data from various sources is a step in decision-making that heavily depends on the decision-maker’s perceptions.
The rational decision-making process optimises choices within specified constraints, following a six-step model. The assumptions underlying this model include:
1. Define the problem: Acknowledge the problem’s existence, ensuring it aligns with the decision-maker’s understanding.
2. Identify decision criteria: Determine the relevant criteria based on the decision-maker’s interests, values, and preferences, recognising their subjective nature.
3. Allocate weights to criteria: Prioritise criteria based on their importance, acknowledging that not all requirements are equally significant.
4. Develop alternatives: Generate potential solutions to the problem without evaluating them, focusing on creating a comprehensive list of options.
5. Evaluate alternatives: Critically analyse each alternative by rating them against identified criteria, revealing strengths and weaknesses.
6. Select the best alternative: Make an optimal decision by comparing options against weighted criteria and choosing the highest total score.
Assumptions of the rational decision-making model include:
1. Problem clarity: Assuming the problem is unambiguous, the decision-maker has complete information.
2. Known options: The decision-maker can identify all relevant criteria, list viable alternatives, and comprehend the consequences of each.
3. Clear preferences: Assuming criteria and alternatives can be ranked and weighted to reflect their importance.
4. Constant preferences: Assuming that specific decision criteria and their assigned weights remain stable over time.
2.7 Improving Creativity In Decision Making
The rational decision-maker requires creativity, defined as the ability to generate novel and valuable ideas. These ideas should be innovative yet suitable for addressing problems or opportunities. The significance of creativity in decision-making lies in its capacity to enable a thorough appraisal of problems, including identifying unseen issues, and its role in helping decision-makers explore all viable alternatives.
1. Creative Potential
Most individuals possess creative potential that can be tapped into when faced with decision-making problems. However, unleashing this potential requires breaking free from psychological constraints and learning to approach issues divergently. In essence, many people have untapped creative potential that can be harnessed through suitable approaches.
2. Three-Component Model of Creativity
The three-component model of creativity provides insights into stimulating employee creativity. This model posits that individual creativity relies on three key components: expertise, creative-thinking skills, and intrinsic task motivation. Research suggests that higher levels of these components correspond to increased creativity.
- Expertise: The foundation for creativity and expertise involves knowledge, proficiency, and abilities in a particular field. Creative potential is enhanced when individuals excel in their domain.
- Creative-Thinking Skills: This component encompasses personality traits associated with creativity, such as risk-taking, an internal locus of control, tolerance for ambiguity, and perseverance. Effective use of analogies, seeing the familiar in a different light, contributes to creative thinking.
- Intrinsic Task Motivation: This component represents the desire to work on something due to its inherent qualities, such as being attractive, involving, exciting, satisfying, or personally challenging. Intrinsic motivation transforms creative potential into actual ideas, determining the depth of engagement with expertise and creative skills.
Notably, the work environment significantly influences intrinsic motivation. Five organizational factors that can hinder creativity include:
i. Expected Evaluation: Focusing on how work will be evaluated.
ii. Surveillance: Being observed while working.
iii. External Motivators: Emphasizing external, tangible rewards.
iv. Competition: Facing win-lose situations with peers.
v. Constrained Choice: The work is approached in a limited way.
2.8 How Are Decisions Made in Organizations?
Do decision-makers rigorously analyze problems, identify all relevant criteria, use creativity to explore viable alternatives, and meticulously evaluate each alternative to find the optimal choice? While this rational decision-making model accurately describes decision processes in simple scenarios with few other options and low evaluation costs, such situations are exceptions. In reality, most organizational decisions deviate from the rational model. A decision-making expert recently asserted, “Most significant decisions are made by judgment rather than by a defined prescriptive model.”The following provides a more accurate description of how organisations typically make decisions.
1. Bounded Rationality
When facing complex problems, individuals often simplify them to a level they can understand due to the human mind’s limited information-processing capability. This approach, known as bounded rationality, involves constructing simplified models that extract essential features from problems, allowing individuals to behave rationally within the limits of these models. The decision-maker identifies a limited list of criteria and alternatives, often opting for satisfactory and sufficient solutions rather than fully optimal.
The order in which alternatives are considered is critical in bounded rationality, as the decision-maker tends to choose the first acceptable solution encountered. This contrasts with the fully rational decision-making model, where all alternatives are thoroughly considered. As a result of bounded rationality, decision-makers follow familiar paths, which influences simplicity and familiarity rather than making the best choice.
2. Intuition
Once considered irrational, intuitive decision-making has gained respectability. There is growing acknowledgement that relying on intuition, along with rational analysis, can enhance decision-making effectiveness. Intuition is seen as an unconscious process rooted in a distilled experience that operates complementarily with rational analysis.
People are more likely to rely on intuitive decision-making under specific conditions, including high certainty, limited precedent, less scientifically predictable variables, limited “facts,” unclear guidance from facts, little use for analytical data, multiple possible solutions, and time pressure. Despite its acceptance, individuals often conceal their use of intuition due to the prevailing social desirability of rational analysis.
3. Problem Identification
Problems lack explicit identification, and one person’s problem may be another’s acceptable status quo. Decision makers often select visible problems, which catch attention and align with the decision maker’s self-interest. Addressing high-profile problems is perceived as more socially desirable and contributes to a positive image.
4. Alternative Development
Because decision-makers seek satisfying rather than optimum solutions, searching for alternatives involves minimal creativity. Decision makers prefer keeping the search process simple and confined to familiar options, resorting to more complex searches only when simplicity fails.
5. Making Choices
To avoid information overload, decision-makers employ heuristics or judgmental shortcuts, leading to biases in judgment. Two common heuristics are availability and representativeness. The availability heuristic makes people rely on readily available information, often leading to overestimation of vivid or recent events. The representativeness heuristic involves assessing the likelihood of an occurrence by matching it with a pre-existing category.
Another bias is the tendency to become more committed to a plan that isn’t working. This is because people want to be consistent and don’t want to admit they were wrong. Escalation of commitment has implications for managerial decisions, as managers may persist in resource commitment to prove their initial decision’s correctness, leading to significant losses.
In essence, bounded rationality, intuition, problem identification dynamics, limited creativity in alternative development, and heuristics with associated biases all impact the decision-making process in organizations. These elements collectively shape decisions, often deviating from the idealised rational model.
2.9 Individual Differences: Decision-Making Styles
People have different styles when it comes to making decisions, and research has identified four main approaches. This model, designed for managers but applicable to anyone making decisions, considers two key dimensions: how people think and their tolerance for ambiguity. Some are logical and rational, processing information step by step, while others are intuitive and creative, perceiving things as a whole. The second dimension focuses on how much uncertainty or ambiguity a person can handle.
The four decision-making styles are:
1. Directive Style: People with this style have a low tolerance for ambiguity and prefer efficiency and logic. They make quick decisions with minimal information and few alternatives, focusing on short-term results.
2. Analytic Style: Analytic decision-makers have a higher tolerance for ambiguity, seek more information, and consider multiple alternatives. They are careful and adaptable, often coping well with new situations.
3. Conceptual Style: Individuals with a conceptual style have a broad outlook and consider many alternatives. They focus on long-term goals and excel at finding creative solutions to problems.
4. Behavioural Style: Decision-makers with a behavioural style work well with others. They prioritise the achievement of peers and team members, value suggestions from others, and rely on meetings for communication. They aim to avoid conflict and seek acceptance.
While these categories are distinct, most managers exhibit characteristics of more than one style. Managers typically have a dominant style but may shift depending on the situation. Business students and executives often lean towards the analytic style due to emphasising rational thinking in formal education, especially in business-related courses. Understanding decision styles can help explain why two equally intelligent individuals with access to the same information may approach decisions differently and make distinct choices.
2.10 Nature Of Individual Differences
Individual differences, encompassing physical and psychological attributes, are pivotal in understanding and managing human behaviour within organizations. Recognizing and appreciating these differences is crucial for effective management. The key dimensions of individual differences include self-concept, self-esteem, self-efficacy, personality dimensions, physical and intellectual qualities, and the psychological processes influencing behaviour.
1. Self-Concept:
Definition: Self-concept refers to an individual’s awareness of oneself as a physical, social, and moral being.
Significance: It serves as the core of one’s conscious existence, forming the basis for how individuals perceive and understand themselves.
2. Self-Esteem:
Definition: Self-esteem is an individual’s overall self-evaluation and belief in their worth.
Impact: Low self-esteem may lead to negative self-perception and challenges in interpersonal relationships, while high self-esteem is generally associated with confidence and positive outcomes.
Management Strategies: Managers can foster self-esteem through supportive behaviour, offering challenging tasks aligned with individual skills, and building trust.
3. Self-Efficacy:
Definition: Self-efficacy is an individual’s belief in their ability to accomplish specific tasks.
Importance: It is linked to success in various areas, including physical and mental tasks, anxiety reduction, addiction control, and illness recovery.
Considerations: Striking a balance in self-efficacy is crucial, as excessively high self-efficacy might lead to overconfidence and boastful behaviour.
4. Personality Dimensions:
The Big Five Personality Dimensions:
i. Extroversion: Outgoing and social versus reserved and introverted.
ii. Agreeableness: Cooperative and friendly versus competitive and assertive.
iii. Conscientiousness: Organized and thorough versus careless and impulsive.
iv. Emotional Stability: Calm and secure versus anxious and insecure.
v. Openness to Experience: Imaginative and open-minded versus practical and conventional.
Significance: Personality dimensions influence how individuals approach tasks, interact with others, and contribute to the workplace.
5. Physical and Intellectual Qualities:
Physical Abilities: Visible traits such as strength, flexibility, endurance, and stamina.
Intellectual Abilities: These are more challenging to assess but include reasoning, memory, comprehension, and interpersonal skills.
Development: Abilities develop from natural aptitudes and are refined through learning opportunities, training, and experience.
6. Psychological Process of Behaviour:
Stimulus-Response (SR) Model:
-External stimuli from the environment influence behaviour.
-Internal feelings, including motivational factors, also contribute.
-Behaviour (response) is the outcome of these stimuli and internal feelings.
Stimulus-Organism-Behavior-Accomplishment Model:
Stimuli(S) – This term refers to external environmental situations. Stimulus has a very broad and all-encompassing nature. It motivates people to take action, interrupts what they are doing, and assists them in making decisions.
Organism (O) – an organism that represents not only a physiological being but also heredity, knowledge, skills, attitude, and so on. It always retains the interaction between stimulus.
Behaviour (B) – Body activities, facial expressions, emotions, and thinking are all examples of behaviour (B). A person’s behaviour is anything they do.
Accomplishment (A): Achievements are the results of behaviour. Some achievements repeatedly stimulate the organism, whereas others do not.
Understanding and managing these individual differences becomes imperative for creating inclusive and effective work environments. It involves tailoring management strategies to accommodate diverse self-perceptions, abilities, and behavioural tendencies, fostering a workplace that values and leverages individual strengths.