Session+03 - TEXASfiSTATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS u..- mm...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–19. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
Background image of page 9

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 10
Background image of page 11

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 12
Background image of page 13

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 14
Background image of page 15

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 16
Background image of page 17

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 18
Background image of page 19
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: TEXASfiSTATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS u..- mm STAR ..,. in... Management 4375 ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR 8: HUMAN RELATIONS Dr. Christopher Hall Session 3 Individual Behavior and Difl’erences Motivation What is Personality? Personality The sum total of ways in which an individual reacts and interacts with others; measurable traits a person exhibits Personality Traits . . . Determinants Enduring Characteristics that describe an ° Heredity individual ’5 behavior ' EnVimnment - Situation The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Myers—Briggs Type Indicator (M BTI) A personality test that taps four characteristics and classifies people into i of i6 personality types Personality Types - Extroverted vs. Introverted (E or I) - Sensing vs. Intuitive (S or N) -Thinking vs. Feeling (T or F) -Judging vs. Perceiving (P orJ) Score is a combination of all four (e.g., ENTJ) Meyers-Briggs (Continued) A Meyers—Briggs score Can be a valuable tool for self— awareness and career guidance BUT... Should not be used as a selection tool because it has not been related tojob performance!!! The Big Five Model (Personality Dimensions) 1. Extroversion Sociable, gregarious, and assertive 2. Agreeableness Good—natured, cooperative, and trusting 3. Conscientiousness Responsible, dependable, persistent, and organized 4. Emotional Stability Calm, self—confident, secure under stress (positive), versus nervous, depressed, and insecure under stress (negative) 5. Openness to Experience Curious, imaginative, artistic, and sensitive Measuring Personality Personality is measured by . Self— report su rveys . Observer— rating su rveys . Projective measu res - Rorschach Inkblot Test - Thematic Apperception Test 5w“ Wamwauma_mnAwmwiunizimapm manual... qmosnr-smequmamauhwmum.” Mm. Personality Attributes Influencing OB 0 Core Self—Evaluation - Self—esteem - Locus of Control 0 Machiavellianism o Narcissism o Self—monitoring 0 Risk taking 0 Type A vs. Type B personality 0 Proactive Personality Values Mode of conduct or end state is personally or social/y preferable (i. e., what is right & good) 0 Provide understanding of the attitudes, motivation, and behaviors of individuals and cultures 0 Influence our perception of the world around us 0 Represent interpretations of “right” and “wrong” 0 Imply that some behaviors or outcomes are preferred over others Value System: A hierarchy based on a ranking of an individual‘s values in terms of their intensity Types of Values (Rokeach Value Survey) Terminal Values Desirable end—states of existence; the goals that a person would like to achieve during his or her lifetime Instrumental Values Preferable modes of behavior or means of achieving one ’5 terminal values Values across Cultures (Hofstede’s Framework) 0 Power Distance 0 Individualism vs. Collectivism o Masculinityvs. Femininity o UncertaintyAvoidance 0 Long—term and Short—term orientation Hofstede’s Framework for Assessing Cultures Power Distance The extent to which a society accepts that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally Lowdistance: Relatively equal power between those with status/wealth and those without status/wealth Highdistance: Extremely unequal power distribution between those with status/wealth and those without status/wealth Hofstede’s Framework (cont'd) Individualism Vs. COIIECtiVism The degree to which A tight social framework people prefer to act 1"? WhI’Ch peofl/E' EXDE'CF as individuals rather Owe/’5 if? QfOUDS 0f than a member of which they are a part to groups look after them and protect them Hofstede’s Framework (cont’d) Masculinity VS_ Femininity The extent to which the society values work roles of achievement, power, and control, and where assertiveness and materialism are also valued The extent to which there is little differentiation between roles for men and women \l', 3.,“ a! Q #9 Hofstede’s Framework (cont'd) Uncertainty Avoidance The extent to which a society feels threatened by uncertain and ambiguous situations and tries to avoid them High Uncertainty Avoidance Society does not like ambiguous situations 8: tries to avoid them Low Uncertainty Avoidance Society does not mind ambiguous situations 6: embraces them Hofstede’s Framework (cont’d) Long—term Orientation Short—term Orientation . V . . A national culture 5 A national culture attribute that emphasizes attribute that emphasizes the future, thrift, and the present and the here persistence and now Achieving Person-Job Fit Pe rsonality— Job Fit Theory (Holland) Identifies six personality types and proposes that the fit between ' Realistic personality type and - Investigative occupational environment - Social determines satisfaction . Conventional and turnover . Enterprising o Artistic Global Implications Personality 0 Do frameworks like Big Five transfer across cultures? P Yes, but the frequency of type in the culture may vary P Better in individualistic than collectivist cultures Values 0 Values differ across cultures 0 Hofstede's Framework for assessing culture — 5 dimensions: Power Distance Individualism vs. Collectivism Masculinity vs. Femininity Uncertainty Avoidance Longiterm vs. Shortiterm Orientation Summary and Managerial Implications Personality . Screen for the Big Five trait of conscientiousness . Take into account the situational factors as well . MBTI® can help with training and development Values . Often explain attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions . Higher performance and satisfaction achieved when the individual’s values match those of the organization What is Motivation? Motivation The processes that account for an individual ’5 intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal Ke Elements 1. Intensity: how hard 3 person tries 2. Direction: toward beneficial goal 3. Persistence: how long a person tries Theory X and Theory Y (McGregor) Th eoryX Assumes that employees dislike work, lack ambition, avoid responsibility, and must be directed and coerced to perform Th eoer Assumes that employees like work, seek responsibility, are capable of making decisions, and exercise self—direction and self—control when committed to a goal 10 Hierarchy of Needs Theory (Maslow) Hierarchy of Needs Theory There is a hierarchy of five needs — physiological, safety, social, esteem, and self—actualization; as each need is substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant Self-Actualization The drive to become what one is capable of becoming Alderfer’s ERG Theory A reworking of Maslow to fit empirical research Removed the hierarchical assumption E (Can be motivated by all three at once) ' WW: 1. Existence (Maslow: physiological and safety) 2. Relatedness (Maslow: social and status) 3. Growth (Maslow: esteem and self—actualization) Popular, but not accurate, theory 11 Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Key Point: Satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not opposites but separate constructs Hygiene Factors Motivators Extrinsic and 3 ' Intrinsic and Related to '_ Related to “Dissatisfaction ” :_ “Satisfaction ” Res-pens ibi lit-y Achievement. David McClelland’s Theory of Needs Need for Achievement (nAch) Need for Affiliation (nAff) The drive to excel, to achieve in The desire for friendly and relation to a set of standards, to close personal relationships strive to succeed Bottom Line: Need for Power (nPow) Individuals have different levels of needs in each of these areas, and those levels will drive their behavior The need to make others behave in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise 12 Matching High Achievers and Jobs / Personal responsibility —> Feedback \ Moderate risks Achievers prefer iobs that offer Goal-Setting Theory (Edwin Locke) Basic Premise: That “5pecific”and “Challenging”goals, with self—generatedfeedback, lead to higher performance But, the relationship between goals and performance will depend on: A. Goal commitment (“I wantto do itandlcan do it”) B. Task characteristics (simple,well-learned) C. National culture 13 Goal Setting in Action: MBO Pro rams Management by Objectives (M BO) A program that encompasses specific goals, participatively set, for an explicit time period, with feedback on goal progress Key Elements 1. Goal specificity 2. Participative decision making 3. An explicit time period 4. Performance feedback Why M BOS Fail Unrealistic expectations about MBO results Lack of commitment by top management Failure to allocate reward properly ’ l“ 1'11. Cultural incompatibilities 14 Self-Efficacy (A. Bandura) An individual ’5 feeling that s/he can complete a task (“I know] can]? Higher “efficacy” is related to: 0 Greater confidence 0 Greater persistence in the face of difficulties 0 Better response to negative feedback (work harder) Self—Efficacy complements Goal—Setting Theory Enhances probability that goals will be achieved Not to be confused with: “Self Esteem”, which is... An individuals’ degree of liking or disiiking themselves Increasing Self-Efficacy Enactive mastery - Most important source of efficacy 5 Gaining relevant experience with task orjob 5 “Practice makes perfect” Vicarious modeling I Increasing confidence by watching others perform the task = Most effective when observer sees the model to be similar to him— or herself 15 Increasing Self-Efficacy Verbal persuasion ‘ Motivation through verbal conviction ‘Pygmalion and Galatea effects — self—fulfilling prophecies Arousal 5 Getting “psyched up” — emotionally aroused — to complete task Can hurt performance if emotion is not a component of the task Equity Theory “Relevant Others” Individuals compare theirjob inputs and outcomes with those of others and then respond to eliminate any inequities Referent Comarisons: Self-inside The person’s experience in a differentjob in the same organization Self-outside The person‘s. experience in a differentjob in a different organization Other-inside Another individual or group insidethe organization Other-outside Another individual or group outside of the organization 16 Equity Theory (cont’d) Employee choices for dealing with inequity: . Change inputs (slack off) . Change outcomes (increase output) . Distortfchange perceptions of self . Distort/change perceptions of others . Choose a different referent person . Leave the field (quit the job) Justice and Equity Theory /—_"\ Procedural Justice * Fairness of outcome process DiS'tfibUtive - "How was who got Justlce what decided?” - Fairness of outcome - “Who got what?” Overall perception of what is fair in the workplace. 17 Expectancy Theory (Vroom) The strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of the outcome to the individual Expectancy of Instrumentality of Valuation of the performance success in getting reward in success reward employee’s eyes 6‘- raw hdiviclual \_/ Organizational \_/ palm me toward 5 CD Ell‘orl-pet‘lorrnonce relationship (if) Performamerewarcl relationship Rewordspenonal goals relationship Global Implications The desire for interesting work seems to be universal Motivation theories are often culture-bound o Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory Order of needs is not universal o McClelland's Three Needs Theory nAch presupposes a willingness to accept risk and performance concerns — not universal traits 0 Equity Theory Adesire for equity is not universal “Each according to his need” — socialist/former communists 0 There is some evidence that the intrinsic factors of Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory may be universal Summary and Managerial Implications Need Theories (Maslow, Alderfer, McClelland, Herzberg) o Well known, but not very good predictors of behavior Goal-Setting Theory 0 While limited in scope, good predictor Reinforcement Theory a Powerful predictor in many work areas Equity Theory a Best known for research in organizational justice Expectancy Theory 0 Good predictor of performance variables but shares many of the assumptions as rational decision making 19 ...
View Full Document

Page1 / 19

Session+03 - TEXASfiSTATE UNIVERSITY SAN MARCOS u..- mm...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 19. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online