Download Organization and Organizational Behaviour and more Lecture notes Organization Behaviour in PDF only on Docsity!
Organisation And Organisational Behaviour / 1
123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121 123456789012345678901234567890121
Chapter 1
Organization and Organizational
Behaviour
1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Organization 1.3 Organizational Behaviour 1.4 Intuition and Systematic Study 1.5 Organization and Organization Behaviour 1.6 Disciplines and OB 1.7 Historical Evolution of OB 1.8 Organizational Behaviour Models 1.9 Summary 1.10 Check your Progress - Answers 1.11 Questions for Self - Study 1.12 Suggested Readings
1.0 OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to: v Define Organizational Behaviour(OB) v Explain the value of Systematic study of OB v Identify the contributions made to OB by major disciplines of behavioural science. v List the major challenges and opportunities for managers to use OB concepts.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Organizations are found in all walks of life. Government offices, banks, schools, colleges, hospital, factories, shops, institutes, political parties and so on. This is neces- sary to carry on activities of each one of them. Organizing is a basic function of manage- ment. It refers to the process involving the identification and grouping of activities to be performed, defining and establishing the authority-responsibility relationship. This enables people to work most effectively together in achieving the organizational objectives.
In general, organizing consists of determining and arranging for men, materials. machines and money required by an enterprise for the attainment of its goals. In its operational sense, the term organizing means defining responsibilities of the employed people and the manner in which their activities are to be related. The final result of organizing is the creation of a structure of duties and responsibilities of persons in orga- nizational different positions, grouping them according to the similarity, Behaviour and interrelated nature of activities. In brief, organizing process results in the outcome called “organization”, consisting of a group of people working together for the achievement of one or more common objectives.
1.2 ORGANIZATION
We will consider a few definitions of some authors. Money and Reiley: “Organi- zation is the form of every human association for the attainment of a common purpose”. Puffier and Sherwood : “Organization is the pattern of ways in which large numbers of people have intimate face to face contact with all others, are engaged in a variety of tasks, relate themselves to each other in conscious, systematic establishment and ac-
complishment of mutually agreed purposes”.
Organizational Behaviour / 2
The basic feature of any organization is the hierarchy of persons in it. It, therefore, distinguishes among different persons and decides who will be superior and the subordi- nate. All the organizations allow an unwritten rule that the subordinate cannot defy the orders of the superiors.
1.1.1 Need for Organization
We need organization to execute the management function. Study of organiza- tion has to be made necessarily for following reasons:
a. It provides an ideal setting for the study of human behaviour. The study of organiza- tion leads to man’s important discoveries that are vital for the continued well-being of the institutes particularly and the society in general.
b. Knowledge of organization helps managers to effectively, know various things, such as how to run the organization and protect the environment needs, how to motivate run the organizational subordinates, how to manage conflicts, how to introduce behavioural changes and so on.
c. Organizations pervade in all the important phases of man’s life. A man is born in organizations (hospitals, clinics etc.); he is educated in organizations (schools, colleges etc.), and works in organization (factories, office etc.).
1.1.2 Process of Organizing
We have seen that the outcome of an organizing process is the ‘Organization’. Organizing is the process by which managers bring order out of chaos and create proper conditions for effective teamwork. Organizing involves the following interrelated steps:
a. Objectives: Every organization must have objectives. Therefore, every manage- ment essentially has to identify the objectives before starting any activity.
b. Activities : Identifying and grouping several activities is an important process. If individuals of the groups are to pool their efforts effectively, there must be proper division of the major activities. Each and every job must be properly classified and grouped.
c. Duty :Every individual needs to be allotted his duty. After classifying and grouping the activities into various jobs, they should be allotted to the individuals so that they perform them effectively. Every individual should be given a specific job to do ac- cording to his ability. He may also be given adequate responsibility to do the job allotted to him.
d. Relationship: Many individuals work in an organization. It is the responsibility of
management to lay down the structure of relationships in the organization and authority.
e. Integration : All groups of activities must be properly integrated. This can be achieved in the following ways: through relationship of authority: horizontal, vertical or lateral. The unity of objectives can be achieved along with teamwork and team spirit by the integration process of different activities.
1.3 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
Each of us is a student of behaviour. We are aware that certain types of behaviour are linked to certain types of responsibilities. As we mature, we expand our observations to include the behaviour of others. We develop generalizations that help us to predict and explain what people do and will do. How accurate are these generalizations? Some may represent extremely sophisticated appraisals of behaviour and prove highly effective in explaining and predicting the behaviour of others. Most of us also carry about with us a number of beliefs that frequently fail to explain why people do what they do. As a result, a
Organizational Behaviour / 4
holds a basic concept that behaviour is not random. It projects the individual’s belief, concept and then interest, etc. there are differences in every individual and placed in similar situations they do not react alike. However, there are some fundamental consis- tencies in each individual’s behaviour, which can be identified and modified to find out the individual differences. Systematic study means looking at relationships, attempting to attribute causes and effects and base our conclusions on scientific evidence. That is data gathered under controlled conditions and interpreted in a rigourous manner. Systematic study replaces intuition. Systematic approach does not mean that things that are be- lieved in an unsystematic way are necessarily incorrect. Sometimes, research findings may also run counter to what you thought was common sense. The objective of system- atic approach is to move away from intuitive views of behaviour towards a systematic analysis.
1.4 INTUITION AND SYSTEMATIC STUDY
The use of casual or common sense approaches for obtaining knowledge about human behaviour is inadequate. Underlying a systematic approach is the belief that behaviour is not random. It is caused and directed towards some end, which the individual believes, rightly or wrongly, in his or her best interest. Certainly there are differences between individuals. There are certain fundamental consistencies underlying the behaviour of all individuals that can be identified and used to alter conclusions based on individual differences. Behaviour is generally predictable and the systematic study of behaviour is a means to making reasonably accurate predictions. “Systematic study” means looking at relationship, attempting to attribute causes and effects, and base our conclusions, on scientific evidence, that is, on data gathered under controlled conditions and measured and interpreted in a reasonably rigorous manner. Systematic study replaces intuition or those “gut feelings” about “why I do what I do” and “what makes others tick”.
1.5 ORGANIZATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
What is organizational behaviour? (Abbreviated as OB) OB is a field of study that investigates the impact that individuals, groups and structure have on behaviour within organizations for the purpose of applying such knowl- edge towards improving an organization’s effectiveness. It is a distinct area of expertise with a common body of knowledge. It studies 3 determinants of behaviour in organiza- tions: individual, groups and structure. OB is also an applied field. It applies the knowl- edge gained about individuals, groups and the effect of structure on behaviour towards the end of making organizations work more effectively. OB is concerned with the study of what people do in an organization and how that behaviour affects the performance of the organization. OB includes the core topics of motivation, leader behaviour and power, inter- personal communication, group structure and process, learning, attitude development and perception, interpersonal change and conflict.
1.6 DISCIPLINE & ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
OB is applied as behavioural science and as a result, is built upon contributions from a number of behavioural disciplines. They can be illustrated by means of a diagram.
1.7 HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR
By looking back at the history of organizational behavioural, you gain a great deal of insight into how the field got to where it is today. Three individuals are important who promoted ideas which had major influence in shaping the direction and boundaries of Organizational Behaviour (OB). They are: Adam Smith, Charles Babbage and Robert Owen.
Adam Simth , in his discussion made in “The Wealth of Nations” in 1776, bril- liantly argued on the economic advantage that organization and society would reap from the division of labor — called work application in an industry. He illustrated it with the help
Organisation And Organisational Behaviour / 5
Toward an OB Discipline
Behavioural Science
Contribution Unit of analysis Output
Communication Power Conflict Intergroup behaviour
Learning Motivattion Personality Emotions Perception Training Leadership effectiveness Job satisfaction Individual decision making Performance appraisal Attitude measurement Employee selection Work design Work stress
Behavioural change Attitude change Communication Group processes Group decision making
Formal organization theory Orgnaizational technology Organizational change Organizational culture
Comparative values Comparative attitudes Cross-cultural analysis
Organizational culture Organizational environment Power
Psychology
Social Psychology
Sociology
Anthropology
Individual
Group
Organization System
Study of OB
of an application in an industry. He concluded that division of labour raises the productiv- ity by increasing each worker’s skill and dexterity by saving time that is commonly lost in changing tasks and by encouraging the creation of labour saving inventions and machin- ery. The result of his theory was seen in 20th century in the form of extensive development of assembly — line production process.
Charles Babbage , a British mathematics professor, in his book, “On the Economy of machinery and manufacturer” published in 1832 added to Smith’s list of the advantage that accrued from division of labor, the following:
i. It reduces the time needed for learning a job.
ii. It reduces the waste of material during the learning stage.
Organisation And Organisational Behaviour / 7
iv. Unity of command : Every employee should receive communication from only one person.
v. Unity of direction: Each group of organizational activities that have the same objective should be divided by one manager using one plan.
vi. Remuneration : Wages paid to workers should be fair.
vii. Subordination of individual interest: The interest of any one employee or group should not take precedence over the interests of the organization as a whole.
viii. Centralisation : The optimum degree of centralization should be maintained for each situation.
ix. Scalar chain : The Scalar chain measures the line of authority from top management to the lowest ranks. Communication should follow this chain.
x. Order****. Material and people should be in the right place at the right time.
xi. Equity : Managers should be kind and fair to their subordinates.
xii. Stability : High employee turnover is inefficient. Management should provide personnel planning and ensure replacements.
xiii. Initiative : Employee allowed to originate and carry out plans will exert high levels of effort.
xiv. Esprit-de-corps : Promoting team spirit will build harmony and unity within the organization.
1.7.4 Structural theory
Simultaneously, the German sociologist Max Weber developed a theory of authority structures and described organizational activity as based on authority relation. He was one who looked at management and organizational behaviour from a structural perspective. Weber described an ideal type of organization that he called a bureaucracy. The detail features of his ideal bureaucratic structure are as follows:
i. Job — specialization: Jobs are broken into simple, routine and well defined tasks.
ii. Authority hierarchy: Positions are organized in a hierarchy, each lower one controlled by and supervised by a higher one.
iii. Formal selection: All organization members be selected on the basis of technical qualifications demonstrated by training, education or exams.
iv. Rules and regulations.- To ensure uniformity and to regulate the actions of employees, managers must depend upon company’s rules.
v. Impersonality.- Rules and controls are applied uniformly. Avoiding involvement of personalities and personnel preferences.
vi. Career orientation: Managers are professionals and not owners of units they manage. They work for fixed salaries and pursue their careers within their organizations.
1.7.5 ‘Social Man’ Theory
Taylor, Fayol and Weber could be faulted for forgetting that, human beings who are the core for every organization and humans are social animals. Mary Parker Follett and Chester Barnard saw the importance of the social aspect of organizations. Their ideas, though born in scientific management, did not achieve any large degree of recognition until 1930’s. Mary first recognized that, organization could be viewed from the perspective
Organizational Behaviour / 8
of individual and group behaviour. Her humanistic ideas have influenced the way we look at motivation, leadership, power and authority today. The Japanese put a lot of stress on group togetherness. On the other hand, Barnard saw organizations as social systems that require human co-operation. Barnard maintained that success depends on maintaining good relations with people and introduced the idea that managers had to examine the environment and then adjust the organization to maintain the state of equilibrium.
1.7.6 Behavioural Era
“The people side” of organization cames into its own during the period known as behavioural era’. This era was marked by human relations movement and widespread application of behavioural research. The era saw two events. The birth of Personnel officer and the Creation of industrial Psychology’. The Wages act of 1935 — known to be Magna Carta of labour was passed in the U.S.A. It legitimized the role of trade unions and encour- aged rapid growth in union membership which opened new avenues to improve handling labor. This saw that the essence of human relations movement is the belief that the key to higher productivity is in increasing labor satisfaction. Three persons are important who conveyed the message that human relations are most important. They were: Dale Carnegie, Abraham Maslow and Douglas McGregor.
Dale Carnegie through his book ‘How to Win Friends And Influence People’ conveyed the theme that the way to success was through winning co-operation of others. His main advice was:
i. To make others feel important through sincere appreciation of their efforts.
ii. To strive to make good first impression.
iii. Win people to their way of thinking by letting others do the talking and never telling a man he is wrong. iv. Change people by praising their good traits and giving the leader the opportunity to seek face.
Maslow proposed a theoretical hierarchy of five Needs: Physiological, Safety, Social, esteem and self-actualisation. He advocated the need of satisfaction of each before turning to the next one. He believed that self- actualization — that is, achieving one’s full potential — was the summit of a human beings existence. Managers who accepted his theory, altered their organizations and management practices.
McGregor is best known for his formulation of two sets of assumptions — known as Theory X and Theory Y. The former assumes that people have little ambition, dislike work, want to avoid responsibility and need to be closely directed to work effectively. The latter assumes that people can exercise self-direction, accept responsibility and consider work to be as natural as rest or play. McGregor believed that theory Y assumptions better captured the true nature of workers and guided management better. Jacob Moreno created analytical technique called goniometry for studying group interactions. He constructed Sociogram that identified attraction, repulsion and indifference patterns among group members. BF Skinner : His research had a significant effect on the design of organizational training programs and reward system. He found that people will most likely engage in desired behaviour if they are rewarded for doing so, These rewards are more effective if they immediately follow the desired response, and behaviour that is not rewarded, or is punished, is less likely to he repeated.
David McMillan : Research has been instrumental in helping organization better to match people with jobs and in redesigning jobs for higher achievers to reanimate their motivation potential. He was able to differentiate people with a high need to achieve -—
Organizational Behaviour / 10
Autocratic Model
In the autocratic model, managerial orientation is towards power. Managers see authority as the only means to get the things done, and employees are expected to follow orders. The result is high dependence on boss. This dependence is possible because employees live on the subsistence level. The organizational process is mostly formal- ized; the authority is delegated by right of command over people to whom it applies. The management decides what is the best action for the employees. The model is largely based on the Theory of X assumptions of McGregor where the human beings are taken inherently distasteful to work and try to avid responsibility. A very strict and close super- vision is required to obtain desirable performance from them. Likert’s management sys- tem can be compared with the model of organizational behaviour. His system (exploit- ative authoritative) in which motivation depends on physical security and some use of desire for start and better performance is ensured through fear, threats, punishment, and occasional rewards; communications is mostly one-way, that is downward: there is little interaction between managers and employees.
The autocratic model represents traditional thinking which is based on the eco- nomic concept of the man. With the changing values and aspiration levels of people, this model is yielding place to others. However, this does not mean that this model is dis- carded in toto. In many cases; the autocratic model of organizational behaviour may be a quite useful way to accomplish performance, particularly where the employees can be motivated by physiological needs. This generally happens at lower strata of the organiza- tion.
Custodial Model
In the custodial model, the managerial orientation is towards the use of money to play for employee benefits. The model depends on the economic resources of the orga- nization and its ability to pay for the benefits. While the employees hope to obtain secu- rity, at the same time they become highly dependent on the organization. An organiza- tional dependence reduces personal dependence on boss. The employees are able to satisfy their security needs or in the context of Herzberg’s theory only maintenance fac- tors. These employees working under custodial model feel happy, their level of perfor- mance is not very high. This resembles again to Herzberg’s satisfier and dissatisfier. Since employee are getting adequate regards and organizational security, they feel happy. However, they are not given any authority to decide what benefits or rewards they should get. This approach is quite similar to partrimonial approach where the basic assumption
Autocratic Custodial Supportive Collegial
Basis of model Power Economic Leadership Partnership resources
Managerial Authority Money Support Teamwork orientation
Employee Obediance Security and Job Responsible orientation benefits performance behaviour
Employee Dependence Dependence on Participation Self-discipline psychological on boss organisation result
Employee Subsistence Security Status and Self-actuali- needs met recognition sation
Performance Minimum Passive Awakened Moderate result co-operation drives enthusiasm
Organisation And Organisational Behaviour / 11
is that it is the prerogative of management to decide what benefits are best suited to the employees. Such an approach is still quite common in many business organizations in India. The phenomenon is more predominant in family-managed business organizations where family characteristics have also been applied to the organizational settings. The basic ingredient of the family-managed system is that, parents decide what is good or bad for their children and managers decide what is good for their employees. From this point of view, this model is not suitable for matured employees.
Supportive Model
The supportive model organizational behaviour depends on managerial leadership rather than on the use of power of money. The aim of managers is to support employees in their achievement of results. The focus is primarily on participation and involvement of employees in managerial decision-making process. The model is based on principles of supportive relationship’s of Likert, which is the basic ingredient of his system 4 (participa- tive). Likert states that, the leadership and other processes of the organization must be such as to ensure a maximum probability that in all interactions and all relationships with the organizations each member will, in the light of his background, values and expectation views the experience as supportive and one which builds and maintains, his sense of personal worth and importance.^28 It is quite similar to the assumptions of McGregor’s Theory Y. The supportive model is based on the assumptions that human beings move to the maturity level and they expect the organizational climate which supports this expec- tations. Various organizational processes-communication, leadership, decision-making, interaction, control, and influence-are such that, these help employees to fulfil their higher order needs such as esteem and self-actualization.
Likert has shown that, supportive model is best suited in the conditions when employees are self-motivated. Thus, this emphasizes not on the economic resources of the organization but its human aspect. Manager’s role is to help employees to achieve their work rather than supervising them closely. This can be applied more fruitfully for higher level managers whose lower order needs are satisfied reasonably. Organizations with sophisticated technology and employing professional people can also apply this model for getting best out of their human resources. However, this does not mean that, this model can be applied in all circumstances. For example Davis observes that, ‘the supportive model tends to be specially effective in nations with affluence and complex technology, because it appeals to higher order needs and provides intrinsic motivational factors. It may not be the best model to apply in less developed nations. Because their employees need structures who are often at lower levels and their social conditions are different’. Morever, this model can be applied more fruitfully for managerial levels as com- pared to operative levels. As such, the tendency of modern management is to move towards supportive model, especially for their management groups.
Collegial Model
Collegial model is an extension of supportive model. The term collegial refers to a body of people having common purpose. Collegial model is based on the team concept in which each employee develops high degree of understanding towards others and shares common goals. The employee response to this situation is responsibility. Employees need little direction and control from management. Control is basically through self- discipline by the team members. The organizational climate is quite conductive to self- fulfillment and self-actualization. Collegial model tends to be more useful with unpro- grammed work requiring behavioural flexibility, an intellectual environment, and consider- able job freedom.
The various models of organizational behaviour are based on the assumption of the human characteristics and how they can work best. Since situational variables are strong factors in determining the organizational processes, managers cannot assume that a particular model is best suitable for all purposes and for all situations. Rather all the
Organisation And Organisational Behaviour / 13
1.10 CHECK YOUR PROGRESS – ANSWERS
Organization is the form of every human association for the attainment of a com- mon purpose.
Organizational behaviour is the field of study that investigates the impact that individuals, groups and structure have on behaviour within organizations for the purpose of applying such knowledge towards improving organization’s effective- ness.
a) Psychology b) Sociology c) Social psychology d) Anthropology
Provides ideal setting for the study of human behaviour, knowledge helps the managers to work effectively, organizations pervades in all the important phases of a mans life.
Five.
1.11 QUESTIONS FOR SELF - STUDY
What is organization? Explain the need and importance of organizational Behaviour.
Explain in detail the contribution of disciplines to OB.
What are the models of OB? Explain them in detail.
1.12 SUGGESTED READINGS
Organizational Behavior – by Stephen Robins – Prentice Hall Publications
Organizational Behavior – by K. Ashwathappa – Himalaya Publishing
Organizational Behavior – by L. M. Prasad – Sultan Chand Publications
Organizational Behavio r – by Suja Nair – Sultan Chand Publications
v v v v
Organizational Behaviour / 14
NOTES
Organizational Behaviour / 16
2.2 FACTORS INFLUENCING PERCEPTION
A number of factors operate to shape and sometimes distort perception. These factors can reside in the perceiver, in the object or target being perceived, situation in the context of which the perception is made.
2.2.1 The Perceiver
When an individual looks at a target and attempts to interpret what he or she sees, that interpretation is heavily influenced by personal characteristics of the individual perceiver. Among the more relevant personal characteristic affectinig perception are attitudes, motives, interests. expectations and past experiences. Unsatisfied needs or motives stimulate individuals and may exert a strong influence on their perceptions.
For Example:
The supervisor who has just been reprimanded by her boss for the high level of workers coming late among her staff is more likely to notice such behaviour by an employee tomorrow than she was last week. If you are preoccupied with a personal problem, you may find it hard to be attentive in the class. These examples illustrate that, the focus of our attention appears to be influenced by our interest and it differs considerably. What one-person notices in a situation can differ from what others perceive.
Just as interests narrow one’s focus, so do one’s past experiences. You perceive those things to which you can relate. However, in many incidences, your past experience will act to nullify objects interest. Objects or events that have never been experienced before are more noticeable than those that have been experienced in the past. In late 1960s early l970s, women and minorities in managerial positions were highly visible because historically, those positions were the provinces of white males. Today women and minorities are more widely represented in the managerial ranks, so we are less likely to take notice that a manager is female.
Finally, expectations can destroy your perceptions so you will see that you expect to see. You expect a police officer to be authoritative, young people to be unambitious, Personnel directors to “like” people or individual holding public office to be unscrupulous, you may perceive them as such, regardless of their actual traits.
2.2.2 The Target
Characteristics of the target that is being observed can affect what is perceived. Loud people are more likely to be noticed in a group than quiet ones. Motions, sounds, size and other attributes of a target shape the way we see it.
Because targets are not looked at in isolation from its background, the relationship of a target to its background influences perception, as does our tendency to group close things and similar things together. What we see depends on how we separate a figure from its general background.
Objects that are close to each other will tend to be perceived together rather than separately. As a result of physical or time proximity, we often put together objects or events that are unrelated. Persons, objects, or events that are similar to each other also tend to be grouped together. The greater the similarity greater the probability that we will tend to perceive them as a common group. Women, blacks or members of any other group who have clearly distinguishable characteristics in terms of features or colors will tend to be perceived alike in other unrelated characteristics as well.
2.2.3 The Situation The context in which we see objects or events is important. Elements in the surrounding environment influence our perception.
For Example You are more likely to notice our employees grouping off, if your boss from the head office happens to be in the town. Again the situation affects our perception. The time at which an object or event is seen, can influence attention such as location, light, heat, or any number of situational factors. Following figures summarize the factors influencing perception.
2.3 ATTRIBUTION THEORY
Our perception of people differ from our perception of inanimate objects such as desk, machine or building, because we can make inferences about the actions of people that we don’t make about in animate objects. Non-living objects are subjects to the law of nature, but they have no beliefs, motives, intentions.
But people do. The result is that, when we observe people, we attempt to develop explanations of why they behave in certain ways. Our perception and judgment of a person’s action therefore will be significantly influenced by the assumption we make about that person’s internal state.
Attribution theory has been proposed to develop an explanation of the Law in which we judge people differently depending on the meaning attributed to a given behaviour. This determination depends on three factors:
i. Distinctiveness ii. Consensus iii. Consistency
Basically, the theory suggests that, when we observe an individual’s behaviour, we attempt to determine whether it was internally and externally caused. Externally caused behaviours are seen as resulting from outside causes. That is the person is seen as having been forced into the behaviour by the situation. If one of our employee is late for work, you might attribute his lateness to his partying into the wee hours of the morning and then over sleeping. This would be an internal attribution. But attributing arriving late to a major automobile accident that tied up traffic on the road that this employee regularly uses, then you would be making an external attribution.
Perception And Individual Decision Making / 17
Factors in the perceiver
- Attitudes
- Motives
- Interests
- Experience
- Experctations
Factors in the situation
- Time
- Work Setting
- Social Setting
Perception
Factors in the target
- Novelty
- Motion
- Sounds
- Size
- Background
- Proximity
- Similarity
Internally caused behaviours are those that are under the personal control of the individual. Externally caused behaviour is seen as resulting from outside causes that is the situations. Distinctiveness refers to whether our individual displays different behaviours in different situations. If everyone who faces a similar situation responds in the same way, we can say the behaviour shows consensus. While responding in the same way a number of times, it shows consistency. The more consistency in the behaviour, the more the observer is inclined to attribute it to internal cause. These are errors or biases that distort attribution theory.
Check your Progress - 2.
Answers briefly:
- What is perception?
........................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................
- What are the factors influencing perception?
........................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................
- What are the determinants of the Attribution Theory?
........................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................
2.4 FREQUENTLY USED SHORTCUTS IN JUDGING OTHERS
We use a number of shortcuts when we judge others. Perceiving/interpreting what others do is burdensome. As a result, individuals develop technique for making the task more manageable. These techniques are frequently valuable — they allow us to make accurate perceptions rapidly and provide valid data for making predictions. However, they are not foolproof. They can and do get us into trouble. Some of these shortcuts are
i. Selective perception
Any characteristic that makes a person, object or event stand out will increase the probability that it will be perceived. Why? Because it is impossible for us to assimilate everything we see. Only certain stimuli can be taken in. Since we can’t observe everything going- on about us, we engage in selective perception. A group’s perception of organizational activities is selectively altered to align with the vested interests they represent. But how does selectivity work as a shortcut in judging other people? Since we cannot assimilate all that we observe, we take in bits and pieces. But those bits and pieces are not chosen randomly rather, they are selectively chosen according to our interests,background experience and attitudes. Selective perception allows us to “speed- read” others, but not without the risk of drawing an inaccurate picture. Because we see what we want to see, we can draw unwarranted conclusions from an ambiguous situation. If there is a rumour going around the office that your company’s sales are down and that large layoffs may he coming, a routine visit by a Senior Executive from Headquarters might be interpreted as the first step in managements’ identification of people to be fired, when in reality such an action may be the farthest thing from the mind of the Senior Executive.
ii. Halo effect
When we draw a general impression about an individual on the basis of a single characteristic, such an intelligence, sociability or appearance, a halo effect is operating.
Perception And Individual Decision Making / 19
Organizational Behaviour / 20
E.g: students appraise their classroom instructor by giving prominence to a single trait such as enthusiasm and allow their entire evaluation to be tainted by how they judge the instructor or that one trait. Thus, an instructor may be quiet, assured, knowledgeable and highly qualified, but if his style lacks zeal, those students would probably give him a low rating. The reality of halo effect was confirmed in a classic study in which subjects were given a list of traits such as intelligent, skillful, practical. industrious. determined and warm and were asked to evaluate the person to whom those traits apply. When these traits were used, the person was judged to be wise, humorous, popular and imaginative. When the same list was modified to cold as substituted for warm — a complete different set of perceptions was obtained. Clearly the subjects were allowing a single trait to influence their overall impression of the person being judged. The propensity for the halo cited to operate is not random. Research suggests that it is likely to be most extreme when the traits to be perceived are ambiguous in behavioural terms. When the trails have moral overtones, and then the perceiver is judging traits with which he or she has had limited experience.
iii. Contrast effects
We don’t evaluate a person in isolation. Our reaction to one person is influenced by other persons we have recently encountered. An illustration of how contrast effects operate is an interview situation in which one sees a pack of job applicants. Distortions in any given candidates evaluation can occur as a result of his or her place in the interview schedule. The candidate is likely to receive a more favourable evaluation if preceded by strong applicants.
iv. Projection
It’s easy to judge others if we assume that they’re similar to us. E.g.: if you want challenge/responsibility in your job, you assume that others want the same or, you’re honest and trustworthy, so you take it for granted that other people are equally honest and trustworthy. This tendency to attribute one’s own characteristics to other people — which is called projection — can distort perceptions made about others.
People who engage in projection tend to perceive others according to what they themselves are like, rather than according to what the person being observed is really like. When observing others who actually are like them, these observers are quite accurate — not because they are perceptive but because they always judge people as being similar to themselves. So when they finally do find someone who is like them, they are naturally correct. When managers engage in projection, they compromise their ability to respond to individual differences. They tend to see people as more homogeneous than they really are.
v. Stereotyping
When we judge someone on the basis of our perception of the group to which he or she belongs, we are using the shortcut called stereotyping. Generalization, of course, is not without advantages. It’s a means of simplifying a complex world, and it permits us to maintain consistency. It’s less difficult to deal with an unmanageable number of stimuli if we use stereotypes. In organizations, we frequently hear comments that represent stereotypes based on gender, age. race, ethnicity and even weight. From a perceptual standpoint, if people expect to see these stereotypes, that is what they will perceive, whether they are accurate or not. One of the problems of stereo types is that they are widespread, despite the fact that they may not contain a shred of truth or that they may be irrelevant. They being widespread may mean only that many people are making the same inaccurate perception on the basis of a false premise about a group.
